F-35A AF-19 First Flight

Lockheed Martin test pilot Al Norman was at the controls for the first flight of F-35A AF-19 on 9 June 2012 at NAS Fort Worth JRB.

Stryker Brigades are killing the Army.

The US Army is losing its future in pursuit of its Stryker concept.  Check this out from AOL.

To bypass these chokepoints, the wargamers experimented with a concept called "seabasing," putting an entire Army Stryker brigade afloat on ships and then landing them at minor harbors -- fishing villages, for example -- or even bare beaches without ever going through the ports. In some ways it was a 21st century version of the D-Day landings 68 years ago, albeit with much smaller forces going much longer distances. Army leaders were excited about the idea, but the actual players struggled with how to implement it. Unlike some past simulations, this year's wargame didn't handwave the logistical difficulties of such an operation or postulate future technologies that would somehow make the problem go away.

"This time they forced us to only play capabilities that are in the current [budget] program, which added a good dose of reality," said one participant, who asked to remain anonymous. Today, for example, the US military flies personnel overseas and only sends their equipment and supplies by sea, which means it has few ships designed to accommodate large numbers of troops. So the wargamers improvised by chartering two civilian cruise liners. They also had to hire civilian vessels to carry some supplies; that proved a problem when the simulated enemy mined the sea lanes, scaring some commercial transports into turning around without making key deliveries - something military crews would not have done.

The wargame also showed a bottleneck in the ability to get troops from the transport ships to shore without going through the easily targeted major ports. To unload from the big seagoing ships onto small landing craft while both are out at sea, the military relies on something called a Mobile Landing Platform, a kind of floating, self-propelled pier that can serve as a port facility in mid-ocean. The problem, the same participant said, is that "there's only three mobile landing platforms that are currently resourced" in long-term budget plans, and some of them were needed in a second simulated conflict underway at the same time in the Pacific. "We had to fight for those to enable the seabase," he said.

So while seabasing is a neat idea, it turns out the Army needs more ships of specific types, such as those Mobile Landing Platforms, in order to implement it. But those additional ships aren't only not in the current budget plan: They would never be in the Army's part of the budget at all. Like long-range cargo planes, seabasing is something the Army has to beg its sister services to buy so they can get it to the fight. That's not a happy fact for the Army to encounter, but it's a lot better to encounter it in simulation than in a real shooting war where it's too late to fix anything.

"One of the great challenges is being honest with yourself: You have to actually identify what you can do and where you have real difficulty -- and that is happening," said a civilian participant. "The thing is, we have to be very clear now. The stakes are much higher from both a bureaucratic and strategic sense... Right now DoD [the Department of Defense] is making hard choices about what capabilities they have to invest in and what capabilities they feel can take some risk in, [and] it's very important that the Army test their real demands pretty hard before DoD makes any of their choices permanent."

Notice whats at work here?

They didn't include the 82nd Airborne...they could have flown straight into the warzone and parachuted in...right on top of the refugees.

They didn't include the 101st...they could have teamed with Marines on an LHA or even converted an oil tanker and flown straight to the refugees.

But a mechanized brigade...that you have to supply and replenish?  That you have to support in the field?  That isn't designed for amphibious operations?

The game players in this scenario probably had to play the game with certain units.  The problem for the Big Army is that its choosing the wrong units to get into the Pacific.  Light Infantry divisions.  Airborne and Air Assault divisions will be the Army's saving grace in the Pacific.

Not Stryker Brigades.

The sooner the Army realizes it the better it will be.

2nd Battalion, 10th Marines....

U.S. Marines with Golf Battery, 2nd Battalion, 10th Marine Regiment (2/10) set up security and await an Explosive Ordinance Disposal team during a patrol through local Afghan settlements in Habbib Abad, Afghanistan, May 28, 2012. 2/10 conducted the patrol to interact with and record data from the local population of Boldak, in support of the International Security Assistance Force.
(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Robert Reeves)

An artillery unit doing grunt work.  And aren't we suppose to be cutting the number of infantry battalions?

Why the Marine Corps is broken and whats up with USNI?

First click here to read an article by Haynie at USNI Blog.

Then read the answer given to BJ by UltimateRatioReg.....

While the examples you cite do indeed separate generations, the divide is cultural and not necessarily age-related. In fact, one could point to long periods of peace and then periods of war as having formed those generations, irrespective of the specific duration of each periods.
No, the generation gap (the “Old Corps” always ended the day before you came in) is not the problem. Peacetime militaries become bureaucratic, because the can, and not pay a high price. Until some supply sergeant is making soldier sign for ammunition while the Zulus are massacring 24th Foot at Isandlwana.
The younger generation earns the respect of the older one by performing to an established standard. Upholding the good name of the unit. Traditions of things endured and things accomplished, such as regiments had down forever, as it were.
Those young Marines are magnificent. As good as any who assaulted through objectives with M-1 in hand. Micromanaging, and zero-defects, and stifling of new ideas are not generation-dependent. They are the result of a culture that has lost its focus on what is important. Training to fight and win wars against our nation’s adversaries. That is a lot more important than perceived “generational conflict”.
When we bend the armed forces to accommodate raising families, sabbaticals, non-military related educational opportunities, and journeys of self-discovery, we are as lost in our focus as are those who think we need Cinderella liberty at fleet week and breathalyzers in the workplace.
As a LtCol, I walked patrols with PFCs who were not even born when I joined the Corps. And we had a Chief Corpsman who could draw on his IRA without penalty. So your assumption isn’t correct.

Now re-read the article by Haynie.

Now answer this question.  Which one is describing the kind of Marine Corps you would want to serve in?

45 Commando's Falklands Yomp.

A forced march of 50 miles and upon completion you go into action against enemy forces....

How many forces could do it today?

Could you say confidently that a US Marine Corps or US Army unit could?  Quite honestly I'd lay money on the Rangers being able to get it done....maybe a battalion or two at Camp Pendleton or 29 Palms (if they have a balls busting CO that doesn't give a rats ass about political correctness)....perhaps the the 82nd....but I bet it isn't many.

I wonder.

New helos in Okinawa....

SIDENOTE:  This is just sad.  First we had a Marine Corps journalist post a story that has the Marine Expeditionary Unit supporting the Maritime Raid Force and then we have this person proclaiming that the 31st MEU "leads humanitarian missions around the Pacific with the help of aircraft like the UH-1N helicopter"...she didn't even get the aircraft designation right in the caption to the video.

Its here....the USMC's forward deployed elements are now MEALS ON WHEELS.  Put away the weapons.  Close up shop.  USAID can do this mission.  Or the Salvation Army...or Catholic Relief Society or any of a number of other organizations.  The pussification of the Marine Corps needs to stop.  I can guarantee you this.  Young men aren't joining the Corps to be part of a glorified relief society.

Oshkosh. Is trouble ahead?

L-ATV

M-ATV

M-ATV Special Forces

TAPV

MTT

MTVR

OSHKOSH had the most to gain and the most to lose in the Canadian TAPV contest.  The problem is that its own vehicles are eating each other.  The only other manufacturer in the defense realm that has a similar problem is maybe...maybe BAE but their portfolio is so much larger that it really just lets them customize vehicles to the needs of the user.

Take the M-ATV.  It has spawned numerous clones but probably most disturbing is that I see nothing in the pipeline once the JLTV is chosen.  Unless OSHKOSH wins they're gonna be in trouble.  Tamir of Defense Update posted a story that they're looking to win orders in Africa and the Middle East but that's a longshot...

On the big truck side its not much better.  The MTT and MTVR eat each others sales and it even flows further up the line.

OSHKOSH is ripe for someone to swoop in, separate the Defense from the Commercial line....buy the Defense line and then pare down the number of vehicles it has in production.

At the end of the day, the MTVR, FMTV and one of the heavy trucks LVSR or HEMT will survive.  OSHKOSH Defense is in trouble.

USS New York (LPD 21) and USS Enterprise (CVN 65)

U.S. 5TH FLEET AREA OF OPERATIONS (June 9, 2012) The amphibious transport dock ship USS New York (LPD 21), left, transits alongside the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN 65). New York was commissioned in November 2009 and is currently on its maiden deployment, while Enterprise was commissioned in November 1961 and is on its 22nd and final deployment after more than 50 years of service. Both ships are currently deployed to the region in support of maritime security operations. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Scott Pittman/Released) 120609-N-FI736-409