NavAir photo releases...
Thursday, March 31, 2011
A bad day for Marine Aviation.
Yesterday was a bad day for Marine Aviation...a stark reminder that even training is dangerous.
First this from NBC News...
One Marine was killed and three injured when a helicopter crashed into a bay on the coast of Oahu, a military spokesman said Wednesday.Then this from Marine Times...
The CH-53 D Sea Stallion, with four Marines aboard, crashed about 7:20 p.m. Hawaii time Tuesday, Maj. Alan Crouch, with the Marines' public affairs office in Hawaii, told NBC News.
An AV-8B Harrier jump jet crashed Tuesday in the Gulf of Aden shortly after taking off from the amphibious assault ship Boxer, military officials told Marine Corps Times.UPDATE* It was a worse day than I thought. Add this to the roll of woe...
The pilot ejected and wasn’t seriously injured, according to Marine Corps and Navy officials.
From Commander Naval Air Forces Public AffairsSAN DIEGO (NNS) -- Ten Sailors aboard the USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) were injured March 30 when an F/A-18C Hornet assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron (VMFAT) 101 suffered a catastrophic engine failure and subsequently caught fire.
The injured Sailors were working on the flight deck near the jet when the incident occurred at 2:50 p.m. They were initially treated by the ship's medical personnel.
Four Sailors have been flown to Naval Medical Center San Diego where they are in stable condition. The pilot was not injured.
The fire was quickly extinguished, and there is no significant damage to the ship.
"I am extremely proud of our crew," said Stennis Commanding Officer Capt Ronald Reis. "The flight deck of an aircraft carrier is an inherently dangerous place, but our personnel are well-trained to operate safely in this environment. They responded quickly, professionally and with purpose, extinguishing the aircraft engine fire."
The cause of the mishap is under investigation.
USS John C. Stennis is homeported in Bremerton, Wash., and was conducting Fleet Replacement Squadron Carrier Qualifications in the Southern California operating area at the time of the mishap. VMFAT-101 is based at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Modest Proposal. Attach Riverine Units to MEU's.
I am about to propose something that is pure blasphemy to the Riverine Forces.
Attach them to the Marine Expeditionary Units, subordinate them to Marine Command on deployments and get them out and about with the Amphibious Ready Groups.
As it now stands, these forces are sitting on the beach with a mission but without the means to get into the fight with a Surface Navy that doesn't want to use them...A Special Warfare Community that already has its own Boat Drivers...and a Command (NECC) that doesn't have the clout to get them where they need to be.
That all changes if they're assigned to an MEU.
Consider this sad fact. Piracy is running rampant off the coast of Africa. Riverine's aren't there. The 22nd MEU is deploying to the waters off Libya. Riverine's aren't going. Unless we're going to disband this asset then it going to take assigning them to an MEU to get use out of them.
Training foreign forces...or training with allied nations isn't good enough. Its time to get them into the fight.
*UPDATE*
Hey all.
I don't want the Marines to take back the Riverine Mission. I do however, want the Riverines to get deployed. If you believe that Riverine Forces will get there own amphibs then you're smoking crack. If you think that Riverines will be able to deploy with MPS ships then you're still smoking something illegal. If you think that you can position gear at forward bases and have personnel fly out and marry up with it you're dreaming. This unit WILL go away unless you tie it to units that are out doing work. If its with the Destroyer Force, ARG or Carriers then so be it but NECC does not have the ability to lobby for its own large ships.
Attach them to the Marine Expeditionary Units, subordinate them to Marine Command on deployments and get them out and about with the Amphibious Ready Groups.
As it now stands, these forces are sitting on the beach with a mission but without the means to get into the fight with a Surface Navy that doesn't want to use them...A Special Warfare Community that already has its own Boat Drivers...and a Command (NECC) that doesn't have the clout to get them where they need to be.
That all changes if they're assigned to an MEU.
Consider this sad fact. Piracy is running rampant off the coast of Africa. Riverine's aren't there. The 22nd MEU is deploying to the waters off Libya. Riverine's aren't going. Unless we're going to disband this asset then it going to take assigning them to an MEU to get use out of them.
Training foreign forces...or training with allied nations isn't good enough. Its time to get them into the fight.
*UPDATE*
Hey all.
I don't want the Marines to take back the Riverine Mission. I do however, want the Riverines to get deployed. If you believe that Riverine Forces will get there own amphibs then you're smoking crack. If you think that Riverines will be able to deploy with MPS ships then you're still smoking something illegal. If you think that you can position gear at forward bases and have personnel fly out and marry up with it you're dreaming. This unit WILL go away unless you tie it to units that are out doing work. If its with the Destroyer Force, ARG or Carriers then so be it but NECC does not have the ability to lobby for its own large ships.
173rd Airborne Brigade's Commander is relieved.
There aren't many US Army units that I consider shit hot.
Fewer still that I think can actually hump with or fight as well as Marines. The 173rd Airborne is one of those units. When I first heard this story a couple of days ago, I decided to wait...I wanted to see more info. It wasn't to be. The Army is mum and the only thing that exists is rumors.
On a sad side note, have you noticed an increase in the number of Commanders being relieved? I don't have exact numbers but it appears to be higher than normal. This story is from Stars and Stripes.
Fewer still that I think can actually hump with or fight as well as Marines. The 173rd Airborne is one of those units. When I first heard this story a couple of days ago, I decided to wait...I wanted to see more info. It wasn't to be. The Army is mum and the only thing that exists is rumors.
On a sad side note, have you noticed an increase in the number of Commanders being relieved? I don't have exact numbers but it appears to be higher than normal. This story is from Stars and Stripes.
173rd Airborne Commander Relieved
by Kevin Dougherty
KAISERSLAUTERN, Germany -- The Army has relieved Col. James H. Johnson III of command of the 173rd Airborne Brigade for serious allegations “that were substantiated” following an extensive review, said the deputy commander of V Corps.
The Army announced its decision on Johnson late Friday. Col. Kyle Lear is serving as the acting commander until Johnson’s replacement arrives this summer. However, it didn’t go into any detail about Johnson’s transgressions, or whether he will be court-martialed.
Brig. Gen. Allen W. Batschelet, Johnson’s direct supervisor, said in a telephone interview that Johnson faced “a number of allegations that were (later) substantiated.” Commanders need to be held to the highest standards, he said.
“Once this is compromised, we have an obligation to take action,” Batschelet said. “These sorts of things can become a distraction.”
While the Army says it can’t elaborate on the allegations against Johnson, talk of the colonel’s troubles are the grist of rumors, particularly in the communities where the brigade is based.
“It’s a pretty grave decision we had to make,” Batschelet said of relieving Johnson. “We hold commanders to the highest standards.”
Based in Vicenza, Italy, the brigade includes six battalions. Two battalions are in Vicenza, and four are in Germany, with three of them in Bamberg. The fourth battalion is based in Schweinfurt.
Johnson assumed command of the brigade in October 2008. He led it on a yearlong tour of Afghanistan, with the brigade returning to Europe late last year. The Army suspended Johnson as commander Feb. 17. On Friday, the suspension was lifted.
“He’s officially relieved of command at this point,” said Lt. Col. Rumi Nielson-Green, a spokeswoman for U.S. Army Europe.
Canadian F-35 Cost.
CBCNew has a report out on the cost of the F-35 to the Canadian Government...
The critics keep losing.
But Mike Sullivan, director of acquisition management at the US General Accountability Office, said he doesn't know where that estimate comes from.110 Million for a stealthy, high performance cutting edge airplane? High. Above projected costs. But still a bargain. And that's if Carter isn't able to drive the price point lower.
"That's not a number that I am familiar with at all," he said in an interview Tuesday with CBC's Power & Politics with Evan Solomon, cautioning he hasn't seen the methodology behind the numbers.
Sullivan said the estimated cost of the F-35A model that Canada is buying is "in the low 100 millions."
"Probably somewhere between $110-115 million," he said.
The critics keep losing.
Pegasus Supports Operations in Southern Afghanistan
Is it just me or does the vid seem to repeat the take-off sequence mid stream?
F-35 News...Acceptance flights...7 Test flights in one day...
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
RAF's death spiral continues.
via the Telegraph ....
Think about it. The Germans arguably have the most powerful Army. Italy, Spain, France and the Netherlands have navies that are equal to or more powerful than the Royal Navy. And when it comes to air power its even more dire.
Read the whole thing but the death spiral of an Air Force is occurring right before our eyes. It will be years...maybe decades before the erosion in air power can be reversed. I think its safe to say that militarily the British are no longer a leading power in Europe.The situation is so serious that the RAF has halted the teaching of trainee Typhoon pilots so instructors can be drafted on to the front line, according to air force sources. The handful of pilots used for air shows will also be withdrawn from displays this summer.The shortage has arisen because cuts to the defence budget over the past decade have limited the number of pilots who have been trained to fly the new Typhoon.There are also fewer newly qualified pilots coming through after the RAF was forced to cut a quarter of its trainee places due to cuts announced in last year’s Strategic Defence and Security Review.
Think about it. The Germans arguably have the most powerful Army. Italy, Spain, France and the Netherlands have navies that are equal to or more powerful than the Royal Navy. And when it comes to air power its even more dire.
USS Bataan
Once more into action...Emphasis mine...
NORFOLK, Va. (NNS) -- More than 4,000 Sailors and Marines from the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) and 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) deployed from Norfolk and Little Creek, Va., in support of Operation Odyssey Dawn, March 23.I bet you a bottle of your favorite alcohol that these men will be setting foot in Libya whether the Service Chiefs like it or not. Three Middle East Wars at the same time. Whose brilliant idea was this?
The decision to deploy the Bataan ARG/22nd MEU ahead of its previously scheduled deployment date was made based on continuing urgent needs in Libya and the region.
"Amphibious ships are optimally suited for executing a wide range of missions, from humanitarian assistance to theater and maritime security operations," said Capt. Steven J. Yoder, Bataan ARG commander. "There is no doubt in my mind that our Sailors and Marines will excel at whatever task we are called upon to perform."
Sailors and Marines of the Bataan ARG/22nd MEU successfully completed months of unit level training to ensure they can operate effectively and safely. During the next few days, the Bataan ARG will transit to Camp LeJeune, N.C., to complete on-load of the 22nd MEU and will continue to conduct integrated blue/green training until they arrive in the Sixth Fleet area of responsibility.
The Bataan ARG/22nd MEU will provide the combatant commander a versatile sea-based force that can be tailored to a variety of missions, including quick reaction crisis response options and humanitarian assistance in maritime, littoral and inland environments, in support of the Navy's Maritime Strategy.
"This team is extremely well prepared to execute whatever mission our nation calls upon us to do," said Capt. Steve Koehler, USS Bataan (LHD 5) commanding officer. "Our Sailors and Marines have worked extremely hard over the last year to make sure we were on time throughout our training cycle, so when the time came, we'd be ready for any tasking. It's why we're here."
Following their assignment in the Mediterranean, the Bataan ARG/22nd MEU will continue with its scheduled deployment in support of maritime security operations (MSO) and theater security cooperation (TSC) efforts in the U.S. 5th and 6th Fleet areas of responsibility.
The Bataan ARG includes Amphibious Squadron (PHIBRON) 6; Tactical Air Control Squadron (TACRON) 22; Fleet Surgical Team (FST) 8; Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 28; and Naval Beach Group (NBG); which includes Assault Craft Unit (ACU) 2, ACU-4 and Beachmaster Unit (BMU) 2.
ARG ships include the Norfolk-based Bataan, USS Mesa Verde (LPD 19), and USS Whidbey Island (LSD 41), homeported aboard Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek - Fort Story, Va.
The 22nd MEU is comprised of its Command Element; a Ground Combat Element, Battalion Landing Team, 2nd Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment; Aviation Combat Element, Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM) 263 (Reinforced); and Logistics Combat Element, Combat Logistics Battalion (CLB) 22.
Monday, March 28, 2011
An Open Letter to Lockheed Martin and the JSF Program Office.
Hey all. If you aren't aware (what rock have you been hiding under), Bill over at ARES has an article covering the generator failure of the F-35 during a test flight a couple of weeks ago. Take the time to read that one and this one too. I challenged Bill to invite the JSF Program Office and Lockheed Martin to write a rebuttal to his article (and Graham's too by extension).
It appears that he's declined.
With that in mind I decided to pen a letter to both offices. Below is a copy of what I sent them.
It appears that he's declined.
With that in mind I decided to pen a letter to both offices. Below is a copy of what I sent them.
Gentlemen,Quite honestly, in the realm of the defense blogosphere, I'm a guppy. I've experience tremendous growth over the last year (THANKS GUYS!) but to be honest BLACKFIVE or Information Dissemination would probably get a reply...me...not so sure. But we'll see.
I'm sure its come to your attention that Bill Sweetman, Editor in Chief of Defense Technology International and a renowned Aviation Writer, has penned several articles critical of the F-35.
Many supporters of this program have sat back in amazement at the lack of response to many of his assertions. The only rebuttal to his claims (to my knowledge) came from former Chief Test Pilot Jon Beasely during an interview that made its way onto YouTube.
His latest claims however, demand a statement from your offices and I would gladly welcome one either at my website or even better through Aviation Week's Blog - ARES.
In this case.
On this issue.
Silence is not golden.
Very Respectfully,
Solomon.
Pic of the day. March 28, 2011.
Assault Breacher Vehicle in action.
F-35 news that you won't hear on ARES...
Bruce (thanks much!...I would have missed this) sent me this article by Loren Thompson confirming my suspicions about the F-35 program.
The tide has turned (I really should have known considering the response to a flight that returned to base successfully under back up power) and the F-35 is zipping through its flight test program. With this new found momentum, expect attacks on the JSF program to intensify. Remember, for some of the critics this is a do or die proposition.F-35 Testing Well Ahead Of Schedule For 2011
Author:Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.Date:Monday, March 28, 2011Tags:F-35, Joint Strike FighterFlight tests of the tri-service F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are running well ahead of the plan for 2011, with 181 flights completed as of March 25 against a plan of 133. In addition, the productivity of each flight test is increasing, with an average of 7.7 unique test points achieved per flight. The combination of additional test flights above plan and greater-than-expected productivity per flight has enabled the overall test program to complete 1,310 test points -- far above the number of 899 planned for this stage in the testing cycle. All three variants of the F-35 are being tested, with the average aircraft performing six flights per month.The test program might have been dealt a serious setback on March 9 when a conventional takeoff variant was forced to make an emergency landing due to a dual generator failure. Generators provide the electricity that starts the fighter's engine and powers flight controls. However, the cause of the failure was quickly traced to faulty maintenance procedures which have now been corrected, and the test fleet has returned to service. These kinds of anomalies are commonplace in tests of new aircraft.Lockheed Martin officials are confident they can resolve problems identified in testing with several parts of the short-takeoff/vertical-landing (STOVL) version of the F-35 being developed for the Marine Corps. Among the fixes required are a strengthening of the doors above the mid-fuselage lift-fan, reinforcement of a bulkhead, and resolution of excessive heat deposition at one point near the engine exhaust. Defense secretary Robert Gates recently put the Marine variant on a two-year probationary period to make the necessary fixes, while stating the Air Force and Navy variants were progressing well.The conventional-takeoff Air Force version will be the most heavily produced F-35, comprising over 70 percent of the domestic production run and almost all of the export sales. The Air Force plans to buy 1,763 conventional-takeoff F-35s, while the Navy and Marine Corps collectively will buy 680 of their two variants. Overseas allies are expected to buy thousands of the planes over the next three decades as they replace aging Cold War fighters and seek a low-cost solution to their requirement for a versatile and survivable tactical aircraft.Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
The UK has a carrier problem...The USS America was the solution.
Think Defence has an article up which documents the current woes that the UK is operating under when it comes to placing their new class of carriers into service in the near future.
The perfect solution is being built right here in the US. The America class Amphibious Assault Ship. Think about it (how do you like that play on "Think Defence"!)
A medium power like the Royal Navy/Marine Corps could quite effectively deploy these ships almost independently to certain actions. As a matter of fact anything short of war would allow independent deployment.
War time contingencies would allow a tailored airwing to operate for expected circumstances.
- a show of force and air strikes over Libya? Simply go with a sea control type manning...20 F-35B's with a mix of utility and attack helicopters...
-peace keeping operations in North or Central Africa? Go with a standard air compliment.
A better solution was to be found. The UK simply didn't reach for it. Heck, even the LPD-17 could have provided almost as much aviation capability as they'll have on their new Queen Elizabeth class carriers! I'm being dramatic but you get the point.
Think Defence wades into the debate from a UK perspective.
Think Defence wades into the JSF debate via the UK's carrier conundrum. He arrives at this proposal...
Naval Aviation has a flavor all its own. One that can't be duplicated by an Air Force. I digress...head to his site.
To be honest, he floored me when I read it. Check out the whole thing to see how he got here. I definitely don't agree with all of his conclusions...most especially the idea of doing away with fast jets in the Royal Navy.A Proposal
I actually think CVF does has a lot of potential, I know you lot might be surprised by this but my objections have always been on cost grounds. This proposal is one possible method of squeezing maximum value for the investment in the most likely missions it will be required to fulfil.
- Switch back to the F35B
- Obtain enough to maintain 6 on board plus 6 on an enduring land based operation (rotating with Typhoon) to support the deployed multi role brigade. This allows for continuous cover for an enduring operation whilst still maintaining enough capacity for the rapid reaction force. Total aircraft and crew numbers would be determined once maintenance and force generation factors become known
- The RAF should stop dreaming about hordes of F35’s and get on with the job of deriving maximum benefit from the eye watering and defence budget distorting entity that is Typhoon
- The Fleet Air Arm and Royal Navy should stop dreaming about having a mini me CVN. The FAA would cease operating fast jets and the aboard aircraft would be RAF operated. We can’t afford two air forces and the largest one, the one that can achieve some economy of scale and is focussed on managing fast jets.
- Complete both CVF with one maintained as an in service spare to cover refit periods.
- Do not replace Ocean, the role to be covered by CVF
- If funds allow, the in service spare could be bought into full service
- Redesign CVF to have an enlarged hangar, at least big enough for Chinook, CH53K and V22 across the full width and length. Also improved command and control and embarked force accommodation facilities. These should be relatively easy changes, even at this stage of the build.
- Invest in a Merlin based ASaC
Naval Aviation has a flavor all its own. One that can't be duplicated by an Air Force. I digress...head to his site.
RAF Tornado gun camera footage from the Libya conflict.
Looks like the Brits aren't as shy as we are about sharing gun camera footage from the conflict in Libya. I don't know what type of munition is being used but I'd guess its a Brimstone Missile...finally note the hit on the last APC in the footage. It didn't look like a clean hit to me...the crew might be KIA/WIA but the vehicle should be recoverable.
Pic of the day. March27, 2011.
The above photo was taken in 2008 and since then the helo detachment aboard the LPD-17 class ships have demonstrated a capability to handle many more aircraft than the photo illustrates.
Pay real close attention when the JSF is being debated.
I don't know quite how to approach this one. So when in doubt run full speed ahead.
ARES ran a story about the F-35's being grounded and GAVE in my opinion, the impression that the generators/back up generators failed on the airplane...Ole Bill likes to dance on the head of a pin when making some of his statements so pay close attention.
Luckily a commenter on the blog gave me food for thought...
Atomic Walrus is exactly right.Atomic Walrus wrote:Hang on a second, here - many of the comments on this article seem to be assuming that the dual generator is intended to be a redundant design. Is that accurate? A closer reading on some of the news reports from the program suggest that it's more like 2 generators ganged up to provide the desired electrical output, with the integrated power pack providing the back-up system. This doesn't mitigate the fact that there was a generator failure due to a simple maintenance issue, but it's a far cry from asserting that LockMart is so foolish as to allow primary and backup of a critical system to be taken out by a single event.3/26/2011 11:48 PM CDT
This is one of Sweetmans statements found on line 3...
Now when I say pay attention...thats what I mean!Bill Sweetman wrote:I think that what is interesting about this thread is how pro-JSF people can't accept a very straightforward observation: that if you have two widgets that are there to provide redundancy in a flight-critical function, and one failure (technical or human+technical) takes both of them out, you have an issue that bears further investigation.
Bill DID NOT say that the generators involved were there to provide backup emergency power. Quite honestly when I first read Atomic Walrus's statement I was high and to the right ... when I finally caught on to the wordsmithing going on... I was still high and to the right.
This one neat, tidy, simple---heck even elegant statement was constructed in such a way as to have a casual reader believe that the primary and backup generators had failed and that the airplane was mere seconds away from falling out of the sky.
That wasn't the case and the issue was quickly solved and resolved.
The entire point is this-- PAY CAREFUL ATTENTION TO ANY DEBATE INVOLVING THE JSF. FOR THOSE THAT ARE IN THE ANTI-JSF CAMP THIS IS A WIN AT ANY COST ENDEAVOUR!
Even the neutral (at least I think he is...he hasn't exactly stated a position and I have yet to detect one in his writing) Graham Warwick made a curious statement in the comments section...
But the redundancy of the system isn't in the dual generators...its in the back up to those generators....Graham Warwick wrote:If I can be permitted to comment on my own post...this will not be news to ardent JSF watchers who caught the story by Steve Trimble of Flightglobal which appeared - briefly - earlier this week.
When it did, my colleague Bill Sweetman made the very valid point that a single maintenance action resulting in the failure of both engine-driven generators must call into question the redundancy of the system, which mounts both generators on a single line-replaceable unit.
Want a balanced reporting of this story? Lets check out our friends at F-16.net...
The grounding appears to have occurred because of the potential for loss of control posed by such a combination.Again...pay careful attention when reading news on the F-35.
Unlike previous fighter jets, the F-35's flight control surfaces are controlled by electro-hydrostatic actuators. If they don't have power then the pilot can lose control. In this case, the back-up power system — the Integrated Power Package which also serves as the starter and air conditioner — kicked in as designed, allowing the pilot to return to base.
UPDATE:
Commenter BowlWeavel said it best...
All I can say is wow
listen to some of you people
Do you have any idea how many different ways there are to wreck an aircraft and/or kill someone with a maintenance error or by failing to follow proper procedures?
give it a rest already
this wasn't the problem you hoped it was
Saturday, March 26, 2011
Canadian F-35 Website.
Definitely worth checking out gents...especially in light of all the disinformation being put out. See it here. Oh and for the curious, below you'll see some of the fast facts that the Canadian Minister of National Defense is going over...
Update:
Since the Canadian election is the latest card that the anti-JSF people are hanging there hats on, here's a site that has current election polling. Sorry anti crowd...the conservatives are winning.
F-35-Fast-Facts-Feb-15-2011
Kel-Tec sucks....
![]() |
PMR-30 |
![]() |
RFB |
![]() |
KSG |
I'm done with Kel-Tec.
They can't get the products to market. They spend more time on marketing jackets, hats and other merchandise than the do their guns....
And if the video from Nut-n-fancy is any indication then they don't even spend time with their own weapons and the gun I was looking at in particular (the PMR-30) seems to malfunction an awful lot.
I'll stick to Rugers or Walthers when it comes to 22 caliber fire. As far as the shotgun and rifle from Kel-Tec is concerned...not a chance.
Paul McLeary at ARES nails it.
Paul McLeary over at ARES has a couple of posts that cover the Marine Corps
If ARES has a ground guy then Paul is that man(trust me...I consider that a compliment!)...and thankfully he covered something that's been bothering me in regards to Distributed Operations and the Company Landing Team Concepts...the issue of resupply.
If you think that the K-Max and upcoming CH-53K's solved the problem of resupply of dispersed company sized units then you're wrong. The idea that in addition to just ammo, food, water and other supplies would have to be supplied...in addition to whatever their energy needs are then you can understand my doubting the very efficacy of the project.
Paul's stories have me switching from doubting to the 'hey its possible lets try' camp.
If that doesn't convince you then how about this...According to Marine Corps documents, the system proved itself such a success in operations that two patrol bases are currently operating entirely on renewable energy, with a 90 percent reduction in fuel required at a third base—and the unit was even able to conduct a three-week foot patrol “without battery resupply, reducing load on Marines by 700 lbs.”
One India company squad leader, Sgt. David Doty, is quoted as saying that on his patrol base, “our generators typically use more than 20 gallons of fuel a day. We are down to 2.5 gallons a day,” thanks to the exFOB technology.But wait...there's more...
A $10 increase in the price of a barrel of oil, at current consumption levels, would be equivalent to the entire Marine Corps’ procurement budget.The new Commandant is winning me over ... not only because of this but because I made a mistake in believing that the wings on his chest carried more weight than the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor on his chest. He's talking the talk and with initiatives like this ... walking the walk. If we can get our bases operating on this same concept worldwide...and find a high capacity magazine for the IAR that will work then he's off to a good start.
I'll even forgive him for signing on to buy the F-35C.
Marine Expeditionary Energy Initiative Website.
US fires more Tomahawks on Libyan defenses
via Alert 5 from AFP.
Wow. This is an impressive war load for a few Destroyers and Subs that are operating in the area. What would be nice is to see a 'war time replenishment' mission. Regardless, the sea services continue to deliver.US fires more Tomahawks on Libyan defenses(AFP) – 18 hours agoWASHINGTON — The United States fired 16 new Tomahawk cruise missiles at Libyan targets on Thursday and Friday as part of the US role in the UN-mandated mission to protect Libyan civilians, the Pentagon said.
The new missile launches brought the total number of Tomahawks used by US and coalition forces to at least 170 as they enforce a UN resolution to set up a no-fly zone over Libya to stop air attacks by the forces of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi.
Pentagon officials said 16 new missiles were fired in the 24 hours to 0500 GMT Friday by US warships and submarines. The missiles are aiming to take out Kadhafi's anti-aircraft and artillery positions.
In the nearby seas, submarines including the USS Providence, USS Florida and the USS Scranton are patrolling alongside the destroyers USS Stout and USS Barry.
The number of Tomahawk missiles used in Libya has started to approach the number used in the 1991 Gulf War, the first conflict in which they were deployed. In that conflict, some 297 missiles were used.
During the same 24-hour period coalition warplanes carried out 153 sorties, officials said, including 67 by US forces.
Washington has said it hopes to turn over command of all Libya operations to NATO while maintaining a support role.
NATO has so far agreed to take control of enforcing the no-fly zone, and is considering whether to broaden its role to take over all military operations from the US-led coalition.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Arlington (LPD 24), to be christened on March 26.
The Navy will christen the newest amphibious transport dock ship, PCU Arlington (LPD 24), during a 10 a.m. CDT ceremony at Northrop Grumman shipbuilding, Pascagoula, Miss, March 26.
The ship is named for the city of Arlington, Va., honoring the 184 victims in the air and on the ground who lost their lives when American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon Sept. 11, 2001, as well as the military and civilian employees, emergency, fire and rescue personnel of Arlington County and surrounding communities who provided critical assistance after the attack.
Arlington County Fire Chief James Schwartz, the incident commander coordinating the rescue response efforts on the ground at the Pentagon during the Sept. 11 attack, will deliver the ceremony's principal address.
Joyce Rumsfeld, wife of former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, is the ship's sponsor, and in accordance with Navy tradition, will break a bottle of champagne across the bow to formally christen the ship.
Designated LPD 24, Arlington is the eighth amphibious transport dock ship in the San Antonio class. As an element of future expeditionary strike groups, the ship will support the Marine Corps "mobility triad," which consists of the landing craft air cushion vehicle, amphibious vehicles and the Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft.
Arlington will provide improved warfighting capabilities, including an advanced command-and-control suite, increased lift-capability in vehicle and cargo-carrying capacity and advanced ship-survivability features. The ship is capable of embarking a landing force of up to 800 Marines.
Two previous ships have carried the name Arlington. The first was a steel-hulled C1-B type cargo ship operating during World War II. The second USS Arlington was a 14,500-ton Vietnam War era, major communications relay ship, which assisted with communications during a June 1969 conference between U.S. President Nixon and Republic of Vietnam President Thieu.
Canadian JSF Briefing Notes.
Thanks Michael! This should spark some debate...they definitely contradict information given on ARES Defense Blog.
UPDATE*
This is the actual article written by Sweetman over at ARES. Just to flesh out the information that Michael sent me and is contained in this presentation document, here are the more 'inflammatory' statements made by Bill...
Canada is likely to be headed for new national elections by the end of the day, following a vote of no confidence inspired, in part, by the majority Conservative party's handling of the F-35 issue.A single defense project...not even one as important as the F-35 could bring down a government. Bill knows this...
This figure was challenged by a Canadian reporter who noted that the U.S. Government Accountability Office, in its latest report, is projecting an average acquisition cost of $133 million. No, Ross said, that number includes research and development -- a direct misstatement of facts.This is a favorite tactic of F-35 critics...they parse numbers, compare apples and oranges and use different dynamics than that being used by the Department of Defense (US) and the F-35 Program office. Its not dishonest...but it is misleading.
DoD acquisition czar Ashton Carter has also made it clear that, absent new management initiatives and efficiencies ("should cost") the program is headed ("will cost") towards a price that the customer cannot afford in planned numbers.Another misleading statement. Carter has already taken steps as has Lockheed Martin to drive down the price of the F-35 toward the established goal. To be honest at this point in the program, the airplane is already remarkably affordable. I can't help but restate that the F-15K, being sold to S. Korea costs 110 million dollars. For the F-35 to have a cost of approx 130 million dollars per plane at this stage is quite simply astonishing. Well done DoD, Lockheed Martin and the Program Office.
Presentation Deck 15 Mar 11_blue_FINAL
Terrible couple of weeks for the world...great weeks for the sea services.
Think about it...
The tragedy in Japan...the start of fighting in Libya...war still raging in Afghanistan...everyone holding there breath to see if the 'uprisings' in the Islamic world spread to nuclear power Pakistan....
But through it all the sea services have had great weeks.
I'm don't mean to be ghoulish but consider this....
On one side of the planet the US Navy/Marine Corps mobilized a fleet of ships/personnel/aviation assets and sailed to the aid of the Japanese..
And on the other side a Marine Expeditionary Unit, a couple of Destroyers, some subs (with another unidentified and unconfirmed sub landing Navy SEALs) and began an air campaign in conjunction with the USAF and our allies.
Add to it the 26th MEU mobilized a TRAP mission and sent an MV-22 along with a couple of AV-8B Harriers riding shotgun to pick up the crew of a downed F-15E Strike Eagle.
And before that happened (and even during it) they've been sailing around the world conducting partnership missions, anti-piracy missions, keeping an eye on the N. Koreans, performing exercises and normally scheduled training.
The sea services have delivered.
Pic of the day. March 25, 2011.
B-2 bomber ops. Lets get real.
Lets talk B-2's and the raid in Libya.
First we have an airplane that in today's dollars cost 1.1 Billion dollars a piece.
Second we have a fleet of 19 of these airplanes.
Third we have two of them being sent on a transcontinental mission to drop a total of 45 JDAMs.
We have mission failure. We have a glamour shot. We have the USAF trying to justify a ridiculously expensive airplane while lobbying for more (NGB).
We have a service without a vision of the future.
Shoot down the idea that this was a silly waste of resources that ultimately wasn't needed and one that took support away from the main effort and all you're doing is ignoring the obvious.
Lastly...if the mission was so necessary for the success of the air war then why haven't they duplicated the effort? The Navy did with its Cruise Missile Strikes...the Brits did with its Tornado missions...the USAF has had F-15E's flying continously....so why no more B-2 missions?
Because it isn't necessary.
Time to put this turkey out of its misery. Kill the B-2 and save money. Put Nuclear strike in the hands of the Navy's Trident Missile Subs and be done with it.
UPDATE*
SMSgt Mac has a website called Elements of Power. Would you believe he has written a rebuttal to this post? Check him out.
First we have an airplane that in today's dollars cost 1.1 Billion dollars a piece.
Second we have a fleet of 19 of these airplanes.
Third we have two of them being sent on a transcontinental mission to drop a total of 45 JDAMs.
We have mission failure. We have a glamour shot. We have the USAF trying to justify a ridiculously expensive airplane while lobbying for more (NGB).
We have a service without a vision of the future.
Shoot down the idea that this was a silly waste of resources that ultimately wasn't needed and one that took support away from the main effort and all you're doing is ignoring the obvious.
Lastly...if the mission was so necessary for the success of the air war then why haven't they duplicated the effort? The Navy did with its Cruise Missile Strikes...the Brits did with its Tornado missions...the USAF has had F-15E's flying continously....so why no more B-2 missions?
Because it isn't necessary.
Time to put this turkey out of its misery. Kill the B-2 and save money. Put Nuclear strike in the hands of the Navy's Trident Missile Subs and be done with it.
UPDATE*
SMSgt Mac has a website called Elements of Power. Would you believe he has written a rebuttal to this post? Check him out.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Pararescue and the rest of the Special Ops Corpsmen/Medics...
I promise this is the last one I'll do on the USAF CSAR mission (at least for a minute) but one thing has been bugging the hell outta me.
My buddy Marcase made the case that PJ's (and again they're probably as tough as woodpecker lips...though I've never met one) are more medically skilled than the Corpsmen that rode out with the TRAP team picked up the F-15E Pilots a couple of days ago.
That bothered me.
It bothered me alot.
The reason why is because the Corpsmen that I've run across have all been extremely capable members of the family. I've seen Doc's go to Marine's homes when the kids were sick to give advice on what was going on. Seen them even deliver babies in terrible circumstances and of course watched them help injured Marines when strong armed men stood and all the could yell is "Corpsman Up!"
So what's a guy to do? Whip out the old Google-foo and see what the real story is...what I found was surprising...only because I didn't remember it.
The US Army Special Forces has a dedicated Medical Sgt. He not only takes care of his team but administers aid to local forces when they're leading insurgents against a hostile nation.
I looked on BlackFive and saw that Froggy posted that Navy Seal Corpsmen are no longer called Corpsmen but Navy Seal Medics...
I went to ForceRecon.com and saw that Navy Corpsmen are "Recon" qualified...they jump, fight, fast rope and dive with their teams...as well as perform medical treatment....
Long story short...its not about their qualifications or medical skills.
I take the training schools and selection boards at their word---these men are all highly skilled warriors.
But I do doubt the efficacy of the mission set as the USAF has established it.
A simple solution is for the US Air Force to step away from the CSAR mission. It requires gunfighters that its force does not have.
Give the mission to SOCOM to be shared with the Navy/Marines and elements of the Army (thinking mainly the 82nd and 101st...I don't know if the other Army Divisions have the air assets or training to carry it out) or...
Get serious about the entire thing and get its Security Forces trained and armed up to take part.
Over 5 minutes in hover...
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
One week in...who are the 'stars' of the conflict...
Time to do a tally of events in Libya...who are the stars and who are the big losers....
Stars...
1. Surface Navy.
The Tomahawk strikes prove that they're relevant, vital and a strategic and tactical resource. Our vaunted air arm still relies on this 70's era technology to kick in the door.
2. 26th MEU.
Its understrength but still delivering. Everyone has forgotten that they deployed elements of this unit to Afghanistan then turned around and are supporting this effort.
3. France.
They took the lead and pushed the US President into supporting this effort. They might have blundered but they brought the US along for the ride.
4. RAF.
They've effectively neutered the Royal Navy and established themselves as a long range strike force despite the Typhoon not being a capable ground attack platform. Harriers would have been more effective off one of their carriers but they've nullified that with their early performance.
Losers...
1. USAF CSAR.
An after action report showing that an understrength MEU was able to pull off this mission will effectively force the end of CSAR as the USAF practices it. I see deep missions reverting to SOCOM entirely. Expect more service specific efforts in the Army and the Marines to operate at the edge of the battlefield with SOCOM operating deep. I expect the USAF to be out of a job and the Navy to piggy back on Marine efforts.
2. B-2 bomber.
Despite the transcontinental flight of two of these airplanes, the efficacy of them as platforms of war must be questioned. They're costly to operate and they still need tremendous support. I believe calls to retire them and replace them with some type of advanced cruise missile will escalate.
3. France.
They want a free hand outside of NATO control. I don't think they'll have there way. Whatever they planned for an endgame appears to already be in jeopardy.
Stars...
1. Surface Navy.
The Tomahawk strikes prove that they're relevant, vital and a strategic and tactical resource. Our vaunted air arm still relies on this 70's era technology to kick in the door.
2. 26th MEU.
Its understrength but still delivering. Everyone has forgotten that they deployed elements of this unit to Afghanistan then turned around and are supporting this effort.
3. France.
They took the lead and pushed the US President into supporting this effort. They might have blundered but they brought the US along for the ride.
4. RAF.
They've effectively neutered the Royal Navy and established themselves as a long range strike force despite the Typhoon not being a capable ground attack platform. Harriers would have been more effective off one of their carriers but they've nullified that with their early performance.
Losers...
1. USAF CSAR.
An after action report showing that an understrength MEU was able to pull off this mission will effectively force the end of CSAR as the USAF practices it. I see deep missions reverting to SOCOM entirely. Expect more service specific efforts in the Army and the Marines to operate at the edge of the battlefield with SOCOM operating deep. I expect the USAF to be out of a job and the Navy to piggy back on Marine efforts.
2. B-2 bomber.
Despite the transcontinental flight of two of these airplanes, the efficacy of them as platforms of war must be questioned. They're costly to operate and they still need tremendous support. I believe calls to retire them and replace them with some type of advanced cruise missile will escalate.
3. France.
They want a free hand outside of NATO control. I don't think they'll have there way. Whatever they planned for an endgame appears to already be in jeopardy.
Is dedicated CSAR a thing of the past? Part 2.
Quick follow up to my first post. Is dedicated CSAR a thing of the past?
Yes....at least as the USAF conducts it.
USAF CSAR is still based on the Vietnam model. They use PJ's operating in pairs (I've heard up to 6 now) to rescue a downed pilot. Even with up to 6 highly trained men, they'll face one unfortunate fact.
They'll be savagely out gunned.
Just as the N. Vietnamese soon learned that they could use injured pilots to draw in vulnerable aircraft for easy kills, so too do our current enemies (this explains the actions taken by AV-8B pilots in dropping bombs upon request of the downed pilots when they saw approaching crowds...think Black Hawk Down).
Loren Thompson said it best in his article today...
In other words, a commitment to doing search and rescue the old way led the service to overlook the much greater performance of the V-22, which might arguably have made it the most cost-effective airframe for the mission.I recommend you read the entire article but Thompson failed to go far enough. The Air Force erred in not keeping CSAR inside the Special Ops umbrella. Unless its properly resourced and staffed (and I'm talking available platoons of gunfighters) then it just won't work in the 22nd Century.
Pics of the day. March 23, 2011.
If you haven't checked out Brian Aitkenhead's Flickr Stream then you're missing a treat. All photos credited to him.
Ok, I might've been wrong.
Mix the Surefire Mags with the IAR and you might not lose a thing. Check this out from Military Times Gear Scout. Awesome. 100 Round Mags and the IAR? It just might work.
Second Line of Defense's Rescue Timeline.
Pretty interesting read...I'm really warming to SLD's site. Check them out here.
USN/USMC-”Ready Now”
By Ed Timperlake
03/23/2011 – An old saying comes to mind when looking at the UN action against Quadaffi and Libya—“Act in Haste, Repent at Leisure.” Regardless of the outcome, some very important 21st Century military lessons learned are already being seen. The USMC for over two decades kept the visionary flame of the need for unique capabilities of the MV-22 Osprey burning. In Afghanistan, it has been a potential war tipping technology and in today’s headlines in the Libyan “adventure” a life savor.
As a fellow Marine Fighter Pilot said to me about rescuing pilots who go down- “I can remember a brief to my squadron (VMFA-451) two days before the start of Desert Storm by a SEAL who had to be all of 21-22 years old, telling us how HE was gonna get US out if we got bagged. This is why US pilots walk confidently to their planes and their competitors may decline to launch; US Marines, USAF PJs, and US Navy SEALs.” With the success of the USMC “TRAP” (Tactical recovery of Aircraft and Personnel) operation to rescue an Air Force pilot on the ground, the 26th MEU time line and distance flown by the MV-22 and AV-8 Harriers is impressive. Let us review the operational timeline of this effort.
Timeline:
Ø 2333B 21 Mar: USAF F-15E goes down, pilot and WSO eject safely
Ø 0050B: 22 Mar: 2xAV-8Bs launch USS Kearsarge (KSG)
Ø 0055B: JFACC approvesTRAP
Ø 0120B: MEU KC-130J launch Sigonella IOT refuel TRAP aircraft
Ø 0120B: AV-8Bs overhead downed pilots with F-16 in comm with F-15 pilot.
Ø 0130B: (quick reaction force) QRF 2xCH53E ready for launch with 46 Marines
Ø 0133B: AV-8Bs drop 2xGBU-12 ISO F-15 pilot
Ø 0133B: 2xMV-22s launch KSG
Ø 0151B: QRF (CH-53E) launch KSG
Ø 0219B: MV-22s overhead F-15 Pilot
Ø 0238B: MV-22 lands LZ recovers F-15 Pilot
Ø 0300B: MV-22s recover KSG with F-15 Pilot
Ø WSO reported in-hands of opposition forces at safe house.
Recently, senior policymakers have called into question the need for Marine Amphibious Ready Groups (ARGs) and also put the USMC F-35B “on probation.” But reality has a quality all of its own, even within inside the Beltway considerations.
Current combat has just demonstrated that not only did the USN/USMC capabilities in the Libyan fight save a pilot but they also are ready to live up to a famous US Navy World War I quote. When a US Navy Destroyer Squadron crossed the Atlantic and joined with the Royal Navy the US Commander was asked when his Destroyer Squadron would be ready–
“Vice Admiral Sir Lewis Bayly, asked Squadron Commander Taussig that question and he replied, ” We are ready now, Sir.”
Currently, from the deck of the USS Kearsarge and other ships off Libya, the America Navy battle cry of “ready now” is being heard. The importance of that battle cry cannot be overstated. Because of recent political squabbling, and independent of the fact that forces are already engaged in combat, current air operations against Libya from Italian Bases might be aborted.
“The squabbling continued as Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini again threatened to take back complete control of Italian airbases if NATO did not take the reins of the mission.”
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/03/22/libya.nato.squabbling/
So in addition to keeping faith in the Osprey, the USMC should pause to give an additional thanks to the UK for V/STOL Harrier– which the Brits unfortunately just retired - and now on to take the F-35B V/STOL off probation. The MV-22, with the coming F-35B and Marine helo modernization, “Zulu Cobras” and CH-53K, along with Marine Infantry and their combined arms will put a true 21st Century US “sovereign territory” force off any coast in the world.
Currently, today’s 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit might prove to be an invaluable military capability to shape American capabilities to get out of the Libyan mess.
CH-53K.
With ARES reporting that the CH-53K is finally taking shape, I thought a repeat of this vid was in order. I can't wait to see its first flight.
Hold the F*&k UP!
The UK website MailOnline is reporting this....
Six Libyan villagers are recovering in hospital after being shot by American soldiers coming in to rescue the U.S. pilots whose plane crash-landed in a field.Flashy...headline grabbing...demonizing US Marines.
The helicopter strafed the ground as it landed in a field outside Benghazi beside the downed U.S. Air Force F-15E Eagle which ran into trouble during bombing raid last night.
And a handful of locals who had come to greet the pilots were hit - among them a young boy who may have to have a leg amputated because of injuries caused by a bullet wound.
But wait one fucking minute.
We now have additional reports that the downed pilots requested air strikes because they felt endangered and Harriers dropped two bombs....the crew of the MV-22 is denying firing shots and the Pentagon is conducting an investigation.
Sounds like another liberal leaning paper was too damn quick to get a headline...too quick to judge...and eager to paint US fighting men in a bad light.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)