Royal Marines Test Jet Packs for Amphibious Raids?

via Maritime Executive.

The Royal Navy's amphibious assault specialists, 1 Assault Group Royal Marines (1AGRM), recently brought emerging civilian technologies to their RM Tamar base in Devonport Dockyard for an innovation day. The idea was to study and think about how new tech can be brought to the battlefield.

It allowed the coxswains and operators of 1AGRM’s raiding craft the opportunity to open their minds further to future developments, using augmented and virtual reality kit, as well as the chance to question how unmanned systems can help them on operations.

As those on the frontline, the Royal Marines are looking to their commandos to give direction and share ideas as to how they could operate in the future. “This has been about exploring how we can take surface manoeuvre forward and all the different technologies that are out there,” said 1AGRM’s Commanding Officer, Colonel Chris Haw. “It’s not something we can specifically use today but something that has potential to be employed in the future.”

Story here. 

Uh.  Wow.  Are they serious?  Do they really see a future once this tech matures/evolves?

US Navy moving on its 6th gen fighter WITHOUT the USAF!

Thanks to Super Rhino for the link!

via Popular Mechanics.

Flightglobal, reporting from the Navy League Sea-Air-Space conference in National Harbor, Maryland, states the navy has decided it has different priorities than the U.S. Air Force. Angie Knappenberger, USN deputy director of air warfare, told reporters that the Navy does not plan on using the fighter to penetrate enemy airspace, a key requirement for the U.S. Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) jet.
----------
The Navy, by contrast, plans to use standoff missiles for deep penetration missions, or hand the missions off entirely to the Air Force. The Navy doesn’t want capabilities it doesn’t plan to use, which should lower costs. The aircraft will likely share some commonality with the F-35C, the carrier-based version of the F-35.

Story here.

This confirms what we've long suspected.  The US Navy DOES NOT believe in stealth!  Richardson was the most influential CNO in recent years.  Remember his mantra and burn it into your brain....PAYLOADS OVER PLATFORMS!

Open Comment Post. 08 May 2019

General Dynamics European Land Systems overview

British Army loses a soldier on anti-poacher duty in Malawi...

Story here.

Didn't even know the Brits were running these kind of ops.  As the Israelis say..."May his memory be a blessing".

USMC back in the ship killing business thanks to the NSM...

via Naval News.

Raytheon will integrate the Naval Strike Missile into the U.S. Marine Corps' existing force structure under a $47.59 million Other Transaction Authority agreement with Marine Corps Systems Command, the US contractor announced at the Sea-Air-Space 2019 symposium in National Harbor.

“A USMC NSM supports the 2018 National Defense Strategy and Commandant of the Marine Corps modernization efforts,” said Raytheon, which confirmed that the USMC NSM will be similar to the one selected last year by the US Navy.

In June 2018, the U.S. Navy awarded Raytheon a $14.86 million contract to manufacture and deliver NSM as the Navy’s new over-the-horizon weapon system for littoral combat ships and future frigates. An order that could grow to as much as $848 million over the life of the contract.

“The Marine Corps’ selection of the Navy’s anti-ship missile enhances joint interoperability and reduces costs and logistical burdens,” Raytheon added. The company declined to detail which USMC platform will receive the NSM missile. “It’s up to the Corps”, Raytheon NSM Program Director Randy Kempton said.

Story here. 

I'm curious.  Will this be a ground based system?  Is this thing even capable of being launched from the air?  A quick glance at Raytheon's site left me blank.

Who does this fall under if its ground launched?  Arty?  Will a new "coastal defense unit" be established?  Will they stick it under LAR's umbrella (they seem to be picking up damn near every other job) or are they thinking something else entirely?

EU makes a move to standardize European procurement...

via Defense News (a-freakin-gain!).

The PESCO defense pact – a show of unity and a tangible step in EU integration – was set up in December 2017 between EU governments and involved two phases of joint initiatives, each consisting of 17 projects.

The third and latest phase, to be launched this week, is for an unspecified number of new projects. The founding PESCO members, including France, Germany and Italy, have been asked to table proposals by the summer with a view to these being approved by the end of 2019.

The new batch of projects is likely to be smaller than the previous two, the second of which was launched last November, and is expected to be more “mature” when it comes to the projects’ setup, including support by member states, one official said.

EU members are responsible for developing and implementing PESCO projects. An EU defence source said, “They are still at an initial stage, or incubation phase.”

Twelve of the existing 34 schemes are expected to reach initial operational capability by 2022, with four of these due to be implemented later this year, according to the source.

The 34 schemes include a harbor and maritime surveillance and protection (HARMSPRO) project, designed to deliver a new maritime capability with the ability to conduct surveillance and protection of specified maritime areas, from harbors up to littoral waters.

Another is the Training Mission Competence Centre which aims to improve the availability and professionalism of personnel for EU training missions. The list also includes a European armoured infantry vehicle and cyber rapid response teams.

Other projects involve developing new equipment, such as infantry fighting vehicles, amphibious assault vehicles, light armored vehicles, indirect fire support, strategic command-and-control systems for EU defense missions, minesweeping drones, upgrading maritime surveillance and developing a joint secure software defined radio.

Story here. 

Oh this is too delicious.

I'd love to see how they accomplish this.  Will they allow production in individual countries?

This is all leading to an EU army.  Will Poland/Nordic countries fall in line behind an obvious French attempt to lead it?

What about NATO?  Will this make calls to pull out of Europe more appealing? A move toward the Pacific is inevitable and every delay is putting the US at risk.  There ARE some hawks that insist that Russia is a threat that the US must face, but many (myself included) believe that the EU can stand alone against it.

My guess?

This is the beginning of the end of NATO.  How they've kept this beast alive this long is beyond me but it proves that bureaucracy at the end of the day exists to keep itself alive.

E/A-18 set to become the dominate aerial platform in the US Navy due to upgrades mid 2020s...

via Defense News.

First, Boeing plans to improve the Growler’s electronic attack sensors. For example, it is considering enhancements to Northrop Grumman’s ALQ-218 sensor system, which is used by the Growler for radar warning, electronic support measures and electronic intelligence, Tebo said.

It plans to add “adaptive and distributed processing” so that the E/A-18’s computers can quickly digest and pump out threat information. And because those computers will be processing more information and delivering it to the pilot and weapon system officer, it makes sense to improve interfaces so that data is easy to digest and the aircrew’s workload is minimized, she said.

Story here. 

Everyone knows my belief.  Stealth is not the future of aerial combat...electronic warfare is. 

I tend to believe that the Aussies are following this line of thinking.  They bought F/A-18s with the wiring to convert them to E/A-18s.

But none of that matters.

The US Navy is already planning for upgrades to the E/A-18 beyond the new pods its getting to do its job.

Richardson is turning into a Naval legend right before our eyes.  Many didn't properly appreciate the "payloads over platform" mantra that he started but its leaving a lasting legacy on the Navy.

The Squids have a plan and they're getting it done.

Impressive.

Navy is signaling that the Zumwalt will be the long hoped for "arsenal ship"...

via Defense News.

The Navy sidelined the guns after the service truncated the buy to just three ships, and after the ammunition, called the Long-Range Land-Attack Projectile, ballooned in price to more than $800,000 per round.

"The guns are in layup,” Smith said. “We're waiting for that bullet to come around that will give us the most range possible. But given that that is offensive surface strike, we're going to look at other capabilities potentially that we could use in that volume.”

The ships shifted missions from land attack to ship-hunting and -killing last year. The Navy is integrating the SM-6 missile, which has a surface-attack mode, and are integrating the maritime strike Tomahawk to fill out the new capabilities.

Story here. 

Ok.  I admit there is alot of speculation going on in the headline but it seems pretty clear.

1.  Land attack is no longer considered primary.  That's understandable.  The sea fight must be won before you're landing Marines...or at least being equaling contested.

2.  Ship killing by ships is back in style.  The article talked about a shift from land attack to ship killing and with the removal of the guns you're talking about alot of real estate to stack VLS onboard.

I won't even dare try and count the number of missiles these ships could carry if the above is true but I would bet if they decided to turn the Zumwalt's into ship killing arsenal ships that could free up the Burkes to concentrate on pure air defense.  That alone would be huge.  Toss in some frigates that could play the swing role between being superb anti-sub platforms to being able to pitch in with regard to anti-surface/anti-air and I think we're starting to see something.

Of course that makes the Zumwalt's priority targets but the same applies to all our battleship class ships (Zumwalt/Burke) and aircraft carriers.

I guess the only question is how do you distribute such a small class doing such an important role?

USMC plans to piggyback on the US Army-run FLRAA programme

via Flight Global.

US Marine Corps (USMC) Lieutenant General Steven Rudder, deputy commandant for aviation, is confident that a tiltrotor can meet the service’s minimum cruise speed goal of 270kt (500km/h) for its Future Long Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA).

The USMC plans to piggyback on the US Army-run FLRAA programme, though it wants a next-generation utility rotorcraft with even more capability than the US Army is asking, in particular the ability to cruise at least 270kt, which is the cruise speed of the Bell Boeing V-22.

Such a desire appears to give an advantage to Bell’s tiltrotor, the V-280 Valor, which has reached a top speed of 300kt. Leonardo’s AW609 tiltrotor has a maximum cruise speed of 275kt, though the Italian company is limited in its ability to add armaments to the aircraft due to a licensing agreement with Bell who supplied the initial intellectual property for the project.

Story here. 

Wow.  I wonder.  What exactly does piggy back mean in this case?  Could we be looking at another F-16 vs F-17 type deal where the winner of one services competition is not chosen and the competitor picked?

If its a truly joint program then the USMC is seriously putting its finger on the scale.

I'm bit puzzled.  The UH-1Z is rather new.  The Corps has stated that they're sticking with the MV-22 and plan new upgrades to it.

So where does this aircraft fit into the scheme of things?  Even if you tag it for long range escort of MV-22s, it was my understanding the the MUX being developed was suppose to fill that role.

I await your answers cause this one has me spinning (ashamed to say).

Winter exercises of the Turkish army “Winter-2019”...via BMachine Tumblr Page.

UH-1 Battle Drills....pics by Cpl. Sabrina Candiaflores

F-35 News. ALIS an unshakable albatross around the neck of the JSF????

via Breaking Defense.

“Software is different from hardware (and not all software is the same),” the report warns. That means the Pentagon needs not only a separate process for acquiring software differently from hardware, but also needs the flexibility to acquire different kinds of software different. Even on a single program like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, for example, the code actually embedded in the aircraft, controlling highly classified sensors and weapons, requires a different approach from the mission and threat profiles, which require a different approach from the maintenance and spare parts database.


The F-35’s maintenance and spares software — Lockheed Martin‘s Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) — has been an unshakeable albatross around the program’s neck for years. Rather than simplifying ground crews’ jobs, Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson has said, ALIS requires them to spend an extra 10 to 15 hours a week finding ways to work around it. The Air Force has unleashed its elite Kessel Run team of in-house coders to fix Lockheed Martin’s mess, but that’s a stopgap.

Story here.

Full disclosure.

The F-35 is a favorite target of mine of govt waste, corruption and malfeasance in office by top DoD officials, both civilian and military.

But this software thing gives me serious pause.

Are we in essence building into our systems a vulnerability that can be exploited by the enemy?  In the case of the ALIS we're looking at a system that is not only causing maintainers to work longer hours (affecting retention) but also because it will be so widely deployed susceptible to all kinds of villains... ranging from bored individuals hiding in the proverbial basement to dedicated agents of foreign powers.

I don't know cause I'm hardly a software guy but from the cheap seats this looks a bit silly.

Collusion? USMC sticks by CH-53K while the US Army cancels CH-47 upgrade contract....

via Military.com

The Corps will not pursue buying Boeing's CH-47 Chinook in place of the King Stallion, Lt. Gen. Steven Rudder said Monday at the annual Sea-Air-Space conference near Washington, D.C.

"We have not found another platform that can accomplish everything we can off of a ship at the distances and the weight that we're asking it to do," said Rudder, head of Marine Corps aviation.

The Marine Corps' plan to spend $31 billion on 200 CH-53Ks has come under scrutiny from lawmakers. Even with the high price tag -- about $155 million per aircraft -- there have been more than 100 deficiencies found during testing.

Story here. 

This is interesting to the max.

1.  The US Army Sec recently stated that the US Army is canceling upgrades for the CH-47 and he challenged industry to produce a faster, heavier lift helicopter.

2.  Despite a price tag of 155 million dollar EACH, the USMC is still sticking with the CH-53K despite it having numerous deficiencies.

Are we seeing collusion?

Have the services come to the conclusion that a heavier lift helicopter is necessary?

If you say no, then I must ask the question.  What exactly can one CH-53K do that two, or even three CH-47s couldn't?

Regardless of your answer its obvious that something is seriously broken in Marine land...and the infection might be spreading to the rest of the DoD.

Once again we're seeing attempts at leap ahead technology...tech that might not be ready.  The track record is stunning.  First the EFV.  So advanced that it was considered unsustainable even without the "high water speed" widgets removed.  Then we add the saga of the F-35.  Even the fanboys have to admit that its been a clusterfuck of epic proportions.  Next up is the super-dooper Recon Vehicle replacement of the LAV-A2.  As awesome as it sounds its looking like a redux of the Army FCS program just on a smaller scale.

The only programs that have been undeniably successful (and this is off the top of my head) is the re-barreling of the M-777 to get extended range and my personal favorite the ACV.

If that isn't enough there is one more issue that is looming that makes me scratch my head.

We're buying capacity to equip a 200K Marine Corps.  That's the only thing that makes sense with a projected buy of 200 CH-53Ks.  There is already talk of cutting boatspaces and I've heard rumors that the 150K end strength is back on the table.

If that's the case then we're not only buying equipment for a force that doesn't exist but we're also being foolish with limited funds.

If the Corps shrinks then so should its buy of gear.

I got nothing else on this except that it bears watching.

Open Comment Post. 07 May 2019

Open Comment Post. 06 May 2019

CH-148 Cyclone, RAPTOR and members of the Air Detachment of HMCS Toronto, conduct Foc’sle Transfer training while deployed on Operation Reassurance...

Army to outfit Double V-Hull Strykers with 30mm firepower

via Defense News.

The Army has decided to outfit three out of six of its brigades equipped with Double V-Hull A1 Stryker Infantry Carrier Vehicles with 30mm guns, according to an Army official.

The service plans to open up a competition to integrate and field up-gunned DVHA1, the official told Defense News on background.

The Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley and the Army Requirements Oversight Council decided on March 20 to equip future Stryker brigades with 30mm Medium Caliber Weapon System (MCWS) capability after reviewing lessons learned from the 2nd Cavalry Regiment in Europe. But he also directed the Army to ensure that the new MCWS capability be applied to the more mobile, better protected DVH ICVVA1 that will be the basis for the future Stryker fleet, according to the official.

Story here.

Outstanding.  While not perfect at least they're working the problem. 

State Department preparing for clash of civilizations with China....

via Washington Examiner...

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s team is developing a strategy for China based on the idea of “a fight with a really different civilization” for the first time in American history.

“This is a fight with a really different civilization and a different ideology and the United States hasn't had that before,” Kiron Skinner, the director of policy planning at the State Department, said Monday evening at a security forum in Washington, D.C.

Skinner is leading an effort to develop a concept of U.S.-China relations on the scale of what she called “Letter X” — the unsigned essay by George Kennan, who assessed “the sources of Soviet conduct” in 1947 and outlined the containment strategy that guided American strategists for the rest of the Cold War. China poses a unique challenge, she said, because the regime in Beijing isn’t a child of Western philosophy and history.

--------------------

 “The Soviet Union and that competition, in a way it was a fight within the Western family,” Skinner said, noting Karl Marx’s indebtedness to Western political ideas. “It’s the first time that we will have a great power competitor that is not Caucasian.”

Story here. 

That last line that I highlighted is the terrible truth here.

Think back to every fight the US has been involved in.  Think about the wars that we've been undeniably successful in fighting.

Then think about where we've failed...or at least not achieved total victory as outlined by strategist that planned these wars.

It's all about Asia.

For some reason the US has had a terrible time when fighting in Asia.  I never considered the racial dynamic but I think we need to put it on the table.

For most Americans the region is a mystery.  For me?  I admire it and respect it.  That's why I KNOW we need to get hard, determined and act with a sense of urgency with regard to China.

They won't quit.

They WILL fight till the last man.

They WILL sacrifice entire divisions to achieve their goals.

Even worse for us?

For some reason the Asian people will rally around their country in a way we haven't seen since WW2 or more recently just after the 9/11 attack.

Don't believe me?  Check out the roll call since WW2.  Korean War.  Stalemate. Vietnam.  Stalemate then total defeat of the nation we were propping up.  Desert Storm.  Total victory!  Desert Storm 2.  Inconclusive, but cannot be categorized as a victory due to the nation we installed now firmly in the camp of the Iranians.  Afghanistan.  Squandered victory and now utter defeat is staring us in the face.

Our strategist need to wrap their heads around the China threat.  This will be a fight for the very survival of our nation.

Chinese thinking will not allow for anything but total victory.  Check out their forums if you don't believe me.