Wednesday, May 02, 2012

Marine Personnel Carrier Program. The delay will cost us.

I have a new cause of program failure.

Not budget over runs, not vehicles under performing...no, the newest and perhaps biggest contributor to program failure in the modern era is a lack of urgency.

I will always contend that one of the primary reasons for the EFV program failing is because it was done in a leisurely manner.  There was no rush.  No desire to get it done.  It was simply business as usual.

I can almost see the EFV Program Manager walking into his office every morning, pouring himself a steaming cup of coffee, spending two hours reading the news and catching up on the latest office gossip...taking an early lunch and then coming back to knock out a couple of hours of work before leaving early to go hit a couple of balls or catch happy hour at the O-club.

Once the program was firmly in the sights of Congress.

Only then did I see (from the outside looking in) a bit of urgency.

That same type of laissefaire attitude is creeping into the Marine Personnel Carrier, Amphibious Combat Vehicle and AAV upgrade programs.


The way it currently stands, the competitors will submit this summer.  This fall we will begin trials with a selection probably next summer...if we're lucky.

The world will change in the meantime.

If Obama is re-elected...and I fear he will be, then you can expect an unbridled President coming at the US Military and defense programs to pay for his pet projects.

Promises made to reprogram money to  update vehicles will be forgotten.

And he won't have to worry about re-election after this one.  He said so himself to the Russian President.

Its time to get busy.  Crack the whip and get the vehicles to Pendleton so that they can be tested.  Now.  If industry isn't ready then too bad so sad.

If not you'll see another generation of Marines riding in these very same vehicles.

HMAS Choules



Australia's amphibious force is coming together nicely.  Couple this ship along with the Canberra Class LHD's and a few F-35B (if Australia gets its act together!) and you'll have a robust expeditionary and power projection force.

Australia's Air Defense Destroyers, Subs loaded with Tomahawk missiles, F-35B's capable of providing protection and hitting targets of opportunity in addition to Australian Soldiers who are probably only a few years away from having a Marine Corps established make this a force to be reckoned with.

Of course the Australian Air Force will be needed to provide Tankers, AWACs and perform home defense chores but for everything else the Australian Army, Navy and soon to be Marine Corps should have any other situation well in hand.

Fuel Efficient Demonstrator Bravo.

via CarBuzz.com



I think I liked the Alpha version better.

If this is an example of cloud design or whatever the buzz word is that the Pentagon is latching onto then they need to drop the trendy stuff and get back to business.  This thing looks like a half baked SUV.

Light Air Support Mission. Why not the A-10?

We're all seeing the furball between the A-29 and the AT-6.

Its nasty, has implications that will affect US manufacturing (if the Brazilian plane is chosen) and has put the USAF in the uncomfortable position of having a contest that will be questioned no matter which airplane is chosen.

Why not simply pull A-10's out of mothballs, refurbish them and have them perform this mission?  In its most basic form its not that much more sophisticated than the two contentders, is more robust, faster, can carry a heavier weapons load and if properly configured can have a similar time on station.

Additionally its designed for rough field use, its combat proven and should be more survivable than either of the other planes.

This is really a no brainer and would save money, help industry by tossing a bone to the refurb work (or if kept in house by the USAF, save money) and is an effective solution.

Quite honestly the A-10 is the airplane that the US Navy should have chosen for Imminent Fury.  I can only wonder if the reason why it wasn't was due to a bit of interservice politics and perhaps a desire by SOCOM for a unique airplane?

Whatever the reason the plane to pick for the Light Air Support Mission is a plane the USAF already has---in abundance.  The A-10.  And if SOCOM decides that they need some in house attack planes and perhaps escorts for their helicopters then the A-10 should top that list too.  Use what we have.  That's the beginning of defense reform.

Harriers almost came back for Libya


via the Scotsman.com
THE government yesterday admitted that it had considered bringing back one of its aircraft carriers and the Harrier jump jets for the Libya operations.
In a response to the defence select committee’s report on the Libya conflict, the government suggested it thought about reversing its decision to mothball the carriers and Harriers in the strategic defence and spending review (SDSR). The reponse also said that the National Transitional Council, which led the anti-Gaddafi forces, could be subject to war crimes prosecutions if evidence emerged. The report said the conflict is expected to have cost £199 million, just £1m under the promised maximum total.
Labour defence committee member Thomas Docherty said: “This admission on the carrier is yet another example of the SDSR unravelling.”
Amazing.

Simply amazing.

I don't know whats more stunning.  The decision to sell the Harriers...The admission that they were going to put the Harriers back in operation...The switch to the F-35C or the possibility of switching back to the F-35B.

This whole thing smacks of politics of the worse sort.

Has anyone noticed that not one of the British Army's programs are caught up in the mess that is the furball between the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force?

I wonder why that is?  Are they just too big to be fucked with?  Or are they considered not to be players in this grudge match?

One thing is certain.  THIS LOOKS BAD.  REAL BAD.