First Army Parachute Battalion (1941)

Arsenal Ship/Missile Barge. Mike at New Wars view.

early arsenal ship concept.

early arsenal ship concept.

Mike at New Wars had this issue pegged a long time ago.  I really recommend you go back and read his take on the arsenal ship (heck you should read his blog even though he doesn't update it anymore, it covers issues that we're still banging around).  Bear in mind that when he wrote it, the issue was land attack only and the main threat that the arsenal ship represented was to carrier aviation being able to attack targets deep inland with greater precision and less risk than manned aircraft.

If we're being honest about it, the UAV is just another take on the arsenal ship, the only difference being that its being deployed from a carrier instead of a 'surface' ship.

But that's not the point.  Read his article but here's the juicy bit....

Besides an immense missile-firing platform, other unique extras in the design included:

• Very small crew-Only 50 were deemed necessary to operate the 500-800 foot craft. Compare this to 300 on much smaller destroyer, or 6000 needed to crew a Nimitz class aircraft carrier.
• Low cost-The initial version cost about $450 million, or about the price of the tiny new littoral combat ship. The huge weapons payload would have added to the cost, but still come in far less than the $6-$8 billion price tag of a heavy carrier.
• Water armor-Plans were for the ship to have ballast tanks similar to a submarine, which could be filled to provide a low profile in enemy waters. An added benefit to this, as proved in the Tanker War of the 1980's, is that such a vessel providing its own buoyancy would be extremely difficult to sink.
• A Digitized Warship-She could have been operated by remote control, with her weapons systems tied into to other Aegis Ships or AWACS aircraft, and aimed accordingly. She would have been an integral part of the US Ballistic Missile Defense program.

Guess what boys and girls.  That sounds like a mix between an LCS (small crew...but unlike the LCS, the VLS tubes don't need to be maintained so it would have been possible), and a DDG-1000 (digitized and networked...just like the arsenal ship was suppose to be). 

But even better is what a kid came up with.  I don't even know if he realizes how brilliant his idea is.  He goes by the name "Infinite Hunter" and he has some 3D models up on Google.  What he bashed together was a fictional ship.  An arsenal ship or missile barge --- he named it a Missile Support Barge (MSB-1) and based it on a container ship!  If this idea was followed, you'd have LOW platform cost, a double hull to help protect it against enemy action (and that doesn't include the armor that the launch cells have!), a small crew and room for any other option you decided to add to the ship!  I like it.

NOTE:
My buddy Joe likes to point to the Ohio class cruise missile subs as being able to fulfill this role.  The problem is that most of the subs missions are classified and have an intel angle to them.  Additionally when called upon they might not be in positon to providethe needed support without risking the boat.  We need responsive fires.  Thats why I like this concept.

We're going to need more VLS cells.

Chris Rawley has an article up on ID where he talks about the Tomahawk anti-ship missile and the issues that have in the past made them difficult to use and how they're overcoming those difficulties.

He also talks about the long range of the missile.

I say that's all well and good but one problem remains.  We're going to need more cells.  A subsonic missile is not hard to kill.  That means saturation attacks....or at the very least multiple missiles per target.

So you take your average Burke class destroyer and now you have to go to war with the thought that I need a war load that takes into account anti-air missions, anti-surface missions and land attack missions.  All these missions are fighting for space in my vertical launch system.

How do you figure out your warload?  Who's gonna get stiffed when it comes to needs?  Is it gonna be the Marine thats looking to the Navy to use its Tomahawks to interdict the enemy's supply lines in heavily defended air space?  Or is the carrier going to have to take a chance that the anti-air missiles that its depending on have been filled with anti-shipping missiles...or is it the LCS' guys that were hoping that big brother has enough missiles to tag more heavily armed ships if they popped up over the horizon?

We need more cells and this, while nice, just illustrates the problem.

*I just realized that this missile really has applications for the P-8, B-52 and even the J-8...remember every sensor must be a shooter and every shooter a sensor.  The Navy is simply providing a tool to get Air Force heavies into the anti ship battle!

Charles Adler BODY SLAMS F-35 critics! Wow!

via SLD...

Canada is getting a big wake up call with this type of reporting!

The final nail in the coffin for US Counter-Insurgency Doctrine.

via Battle Rattle...

The Afghan police and the Marines had a good relationship,’ said one Marine on the team, who arrived at the grisly scene shortly after the attack. ‘A few of the Afghan police even broke into tears afterwards when they realized what had happened.’

 A few things...

 *Anyone who is still talking about good relationships with Afghan forces after witnessing/hearing about all these attacks is smoking crack, doesn't deserve to be in a leadership position and should be immediately discharged.

*Hearts and minds, the backbone of US counterinsurgency doctrine, is dead as a door nail.  We have done nothing but pour money into that country, build roads/schools/infrastructure, basically we've brought civilization where it wasn't wanted...and yet we still haven't won them over.  Like a trying to turn a hooker into a housewife, it just ain't gonna work.

*General Allen has gone halfway to fixing the problem.  All personnel will be armed now.  Mind you its condition 3 on Jeff Cooper scale but at least they'll have ammo in their guns instead of running around with weapons and NO magazines (as has been the case until now).  People will still die because they'll fumble around trying to get there weapon setup to fire, forgetting that they have to chamber a round AND take it off safe but this is better than nothing.

Good guys are dying for people that just don't give a damn.  The Afghans are not worth the sacrifice.

Dauntless in the Falklands.

The Brits are playing off the Dauntless being in the Falklands with captions like this....

The bleak beauty of the Falkands on a glorious winter’s day provided the stunning mise-en-scène for HMS Dauntless.

The Portsmouth-based warship quickly proved a hit with islanders – youngsters especially – who visited her at the remote East Cove port on East Falkland.

That's cute with a big dash of British understatement but I believe we're seeing chess being played against the Argentinian government.  First we heard of a US oil company getting rights to oil exploration off the coast and now we see a powerful warship prowling the waters.

They didn't chest thump or make public pronouncements.  They made two shrewd moves and have their enemy in check!

pics via Royal Navy News...

Individual Rushes..

Photos by Lance Cpl. Ali Azimi

Lance Cpl. Thomas Overzet, rifleman, 1st Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, conducts buddy rushes on Range 105 Aug. 14, 2012. Approximately 150 Marines are visiting the Combat Center from Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Calif. as part of their Tactical Small Unit Leaders Course.

Lance Cpl. Cosmo Peters, machine gunner, Company A, 1st Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, conducts buddy rushes on Range 105, during the unit's Tactical Small Leaders Course Aug. 14, 2012

Lance Cpl. Thomas Overzet, rifleman, Company A, 1st Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, fires a round during a buddy rushing exercise at Range 105, as part of the unit's Tactical Small Unit Leaders Course, Aug. 14, 2012.

Lance Cpl. Luis Garces, rifleman, Company B, 1st Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, kneels to the ground while conducting buddy rushes on Range 105, Aug. 14. Approximately 150 Marines visited the Combat Center from Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Calif., as part of the Tactical Small Unit Leaders Course.

Update. Kill the Mobile Landing Platform.

The above pic illustrates what we already have in service and why the Navy shouldn't allocate any more funds to the fictional sea base.

We already have what we need. 

We should better use the tools that we already have in our toolbox.

The Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) is a luxury that we don't need and can't afford.  'Nuff said.