US Marines and Army disappointed by latest budget

via SeaPower Magazine.

The fiscal 2018 defense budget request provides only “modest improvements” in funding for the Army and the Marine Corps, a fact that clearly disappointed both senior officers from the two services and members of the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee May 24

That led subcommittee Chairman Mike Turner to ask what the services would do if additional funds were provided and to request submission of their unfunded requirements list as soon as possible.

“I am concerned that the current budget does not go far enough,” the Ohio Republican said, noting that the Trump administration’s defense request for $603 billion was only 3 percent above last year’s request.

“I’m concerned that we are losing our competitive advantage over our near peer competitors,” Turner said.

He supported the $640 billion proposal from HASC Chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas.

Ranking Democrat Niki Tsongas said the request for the Army and Marines “do appear to show modest growth,” which the Massachusetts representative called “welcomed news” given the urgent need for modernization of the ground capabilities.

Similar complaints came from other panel members in a hearing cut short by extensive floor votes.

Lt. Gen. John Murray, the Army’s top resources officer, and Lt. Gen. Gary Thomas, the Marine Corps deputy commandant for Resources and Programs, agreed that the proposed budget did not provide much relief from the extended requirement to prioritize current readiness for the deployed forces at the expense of modernization.
Thomas said the Marines would focus the limited modernization funds on replacement of their aged legacy systems with the Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV), the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, the F-35B Lighting II joint strike fighter and the CH-53K heavy lift helicopter. The Corps also would fund changes in their equipment sets to support mobile, networked forces and to expand use of unmanned systems, he said.

Both of the officers answered “yes” to Turner’s question of whether they could accelerate modernization programs if provided more funds. They also agreed that the policy calling for elimination of “cluster munitions,” which are rocket rounds or aerial bombs that disperse dozens of small explosive charges, would eliminate an important capability.

The two said they are pushing programs to improve their long-range support weapons, with the Marines seeking to buy additional munitions for their High Mobility Artillery Rocket System.

On the Marines’ top ground combat modernization program, the ACV, Thomas said their budget requests a small number of vehicles because they planned to select one of the two competing prototypes later in fiscal 2018 to start low-rate production. While they could not accelerate initial operational capability even with additional funding, they could speed up the full operational capability with more money.

This entire article needed to be highlighted.

Question.

What happens when your hope for more funding falls flat because of Inside the Beltway gamesmanship, and you've pissed away too much money on the F-35?  I don't know but we're about to see!

The plan on how they would put all this together is becoming quite clear.

They would push  for the F-35 as soon as possible.  They were aware of the fact that it was eating up money that the rest of the force desperately needs but they felt it was a gamble worth taking.

It would have worked too, except that the F-35 continues to linger in development hell, and even the plan to buy more planes sooner isn't gonna solve the expense problem because all those early buys will need to be updated to the final version.  In other words the more planes they buy early the more it will cost to fix them at the end of testing.

HQMC is gonna have to readjust.  It has to come up with a new plan because the old plan is DRT.  Dead Right There!

Sidenote:  What has me scratching my head is the part where the Congress Critter asked the General if they got additional funds could they speed up the ACV program.  The General said no, but that more funding could speed up the full operational capability?  Was he high at the time?  A year long test is bullshit!  They're basically asking you to ask for more money and he says no? I wonder why he can't adjust the plan to do more faster!  Either he's crazy or we're seeing some financial common sense returning to the Marine Corps.

Politics Talk. It was fun and games but now you screwed the Brits! Now we have an opportunity!

via Washington Post.

President Trump on Thursday denounced U.S. leaks about Britain’s investigation of the Manchester terrorist bombing as “deeply troubling” and asked the U.S. Justice Department and other agencies to launch a full investigation.

Leaks from the ongoing probe — including the publication of crime-scene photos in the New York Times and the naming of the suspected bomber by U.S. broadcasters — have provoked ire from British officials.

In response to the disclosures, British police investigating the Manchester attack took the highly unusual step of withholding information from U.S. agencies, whom they believe are responsible for the leaks. But by late Thursday evening, police said they had resumed intelligence sharing following “fresh assurances.”

British authorities have not said that the leaks have hurt the investigation into worst terrorist attack in Britain in more than a decade -- 22 people died and 116 were injured Monday evening following a bomb explosion at the conclusion of a pop concert in Manchester.

But some commentators have suggested that publishing the name of the suspected bomber could have compromised the investigation. Withholding of the name for longer could have allowed authorities to track down people who may have since gone to ground, they said.

I've said the intel agencies were out of control but the media and some of my readers instead called the leaks and the leakers patriots.

Trump himself has actually bitched about the leaks and called for an investigation of them.

It all fell on deaf ears.

News reporters and the leakers reveled in the glory of being defenders of the American people by letting top secret and above info into the wild.  They basked in the idea that they "made journalism cool again".

The made excuses.

Now?

Now Trump has the ammo necessary to do a real deal purge.  He has a golden ticket to ruin the deep state and start an effort to hunt down the leakers.

It wouldn't surprise me if there isn't a secret court order that gives permission to start tapping phones and monitoring communications from certain individuals based on national security!

The only laughable part of this whole thing is the Brit decision to stop sharing information.  I'd bet body parts that the statement was made to satisfy UK popular opinion.  What do I base that on?  McMaster has said nothing.  Not a word about the leak.  Not a word about the British action.

This tough talk from the British Prime Minister is just talk.

If I'm wrong then the Brits have a huge, low hanging pair of " don't give a fuck" on them.

T-50A Air-to-Air Footage

Ben Carson's controversial statement about poverty lacks nuance.

via CBS News.

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson said in a radio interview airing Wednesday that a mindset parents hand down to their children contributes to poverty.

"I think poverty to a large extent is also a state of mind," Carson said in a SiriusXM radio interview with Armstrong Williams, a top adviser to Carson's 2016 presidential campaign. "You take somebody that has the right mindset, you can take everything from them and put them on the street, and I guarantee in a little while they'll be right back up there."

"And you take somebody with the wrong mindset, you can give them everything in the world, they'll work their way right back down to the bottom," the neurosurgeon continued.

The former GOP contender also referred to a "poverty of the spirit" and a "wrong mindset" that can develop from inadequate parenting and a negative environment.

"I think the majority of people don't have that defeatist attitude, but they sometimes just don't see the way, and that's where government can come in and be very helpful," Carson said. "It can provide the ladder of opportunity, it can provide the mechanism that will demonstrate to them what can be done."

Wow.  For such a smart guy Carson can be a real ass.  His statement lacks NUANCE...and understanding...and empathy.

But he was onto something and didn't even realize it.

What he should have said is that poverty...not having certain goods or being able to afford certain things....is real.

If that poverty extends to not even being able to put food on your table or clothes on your back then it is crushing, back breaking and intolerable for a nation such as our own.

But that isn't the reality for a majority of people that we consider as living in poverty.

The issue is behavior.  The issue is pride.  The issue is having a personal view of yourself that will not condone certain 'actions'.

My grandparents were poor for a loong time and made it to the middle class toward the late stages of their life.

What did I hear from them constantly?

We might be poor but we're proud.

Just because we're poor doesn't mean you have to be nasty.

They can act like that but we don't.  We're no better than them, but we won't be like them.

What was the practical application of those statements that ring in my ear to this very day?  My granny was a neat freak from hell!  You better not let a crumb rest on the dinner table after eating.  Grandpa would have you cutting the yard even if you thought that it didn't need cutting!

You heading out the door?  Shirt tucked in and you better have yourself squared away!

You see some kids acting out in a local store and running around like they lost their minds?  You sure as hell better not take part in the shenanigans!

Carson was wrong in his statement (in my opinion), he had a point but stopped short of the mark.  If he was a bit more nuanced and took the economic factor out of it then he would have been spot on.

MD Helicopters supports Afghan MD530Fs....

via UPI.

MD Helicopters Inc. has received a $76.7 million contract for logistical and contractor support for the MD 530F helicopter, the Department of Defense announced Tuesday. The contract falls under foreign military sales to the Afghanistan Air Force.

U.S. Army Fiscal 2017 funds of $37.6 million have been allocated to the program. Work will be completed in Mesa, Ariz., and Afghanistan. The program is expected to be finished by May 31, 2018.

"The MD-530s are flying multiple missions a day across Afghanistan," Air Force Lt. Col. Bill Ashford of the 438th Air Expeditionary Advisory Squadron said last year following delivery of 27 of the helicopters to Afghanistan last year.

"They are often engaged in providing aerial escort to convoys, providing over-watch to ANDSF operations and responding to 'troops in contact' situations."

This is a totally unremarkable story except for a couple of issues it highlights. First the MD530 is a lightweight and by comparison, simple helicopter.  That MD is able to get such a meaty contract to support them is disturbing.

The Afghans will NEVER be able to form a proper military.  We've been training and advising for over a decade and it should be obvious by now.  They either don't want to, or can't learn to fight the "US way".

Maybe we should supply them with Vietnam era weapons instead.  They face an insurgency, not a high tech army.  I believe we should supply them accordingly.

Next is how we've approached fighting in Afghanistan.

We've been pushing that advise and assist nonsense for far too long.  It's past time for the US military to step aside and let the tribes determine their own futures.  Either they agree to stop fighting or they don't.  But we get out of the way and let them determine their own future.

If a threat pops up in the future then we solve it with some modern day B-52 Arc Light missions that make the MOAB strike look like a gentle spring shower.

It's past time to stop spending blood and treasure on people that won't fight for themselves.

Open Comment Post. May 25, 2017

6th gen fighter receives major budget boost...

via Defense Tech.

“RDT&E funding allows us to do is to take an idea to — to leap an idea to technology we’ll use every day,” Maj. Gen. James Martin, the Air Force’s deputy assistant secretary for budget, said during a budget briefing at the Pentagon. “The capability gap is closing and we must continue to invest in game-changing technology such as hypersonics, directed energy, unmanned autonomous systems, and nanotechnology.”

Next Gen Air Dominance, also known as Penetrating Counter Air, received a hike in line with the service’s Air Superiority 2030 roadmap study completed last May, an Air Force spokeswoman told Military.com Tuesday.

The study is designed to identify shortcomings in the existing fighter fleet that could be addressed with advanced fighter aircraft, sensors and weapons in a growing and unpredictable threat environment.

“We have to be ready for not only what we need today but we better be ready for the potential threats … 10, 20 years from now,” Martin said.

This is curious.  The USAF has said on various occasions that the F-35 is superior to the F-22 in many scenarios and that it will serve till 2050 and some have even said 2070.

So with that being the case why are they talking about potential threats in the 10-20 year timeframe?  Why are they pumping money into a next gen fighter instead of dumping every penny to make the F-35 work now?

This is off and is another clue.  What it's telling us is just beyond me but there is a message here.

Marine Aviation is still in the hurt locker...

via National Interest.

The United States Navy has awarded Boeing a new contract to help resolve serious readiness problems with its F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet fleets.

The Department of the Navy’s (DON) strike fighter squadrons are in a dire situation where—at least at last report during Congressional testimony on Feb.7, 2017—more than 62 percent of the service’s fighters are for all intents and purposes grounded. Of that total, the Marine Corps’ strike fighter fleet—which is composed mostly of older original model F/A-18A/B/C/D Hornets—is in even worse shape with as many as 74 percent of its jets not ready for war.

The DON is taking steps to resolve the problem, which is the cumulative result of years of overuse and funding disruptions that stem from the 2011 Budget Control Act. Additionally, in the case of the Marine Corps, the service made some very poor decisions on aircraft procurement—betting its future on the on-time arrival of the Lockheed Martin F-35B Joint Strike Fighter.

The solution to the problem is to increase the purchase of spare parts and push aircraft through depot maintenance faster. This new $238 million contract extension with Boeing to upgrade additional F/A-18s for the Navy and Marine Corps is part of that overall effort. The company’s Cecil Field facility will perform high flight-hour inspections, periodic maintenance inspections, in-service repair and modifications, upgrades and other engineering work for the aircraft.

“Our mission is to support the Navy’s effort to improve readiness,” Travis McBurnett, Boeing’s F/A-18 Sustainment program director, said in a statement. “Since 1999, the Boeing Cecil Field team has returned 880 modified or repaired F/A-18s to the Navy and Marines. We look forward to delivering many more in the coming years.”

However, even in the best-case scenario, it will take the DON—both the Navy and Marine Corps—years to recover from this debacle. That’s assuming stable funding without periodic disruptions as a result various continuing resolutions that are increasingly common as Congress routinely fails to pass budgets year after year. It’s not like this is a new problem—I’ve reported on this issue since before 2014 for The Daily Beast. If anything, matters have gotten worse year over year.

Let's highlight that sentence one more time for effect...

 Additionally, in the case of the Marine Corps, the service made some very poor decisions on aircraft procurement—betting its future on the on-time arrival of the Lockheed Martin F-35B Joint Strike Fighter.

This era of Marine Corps aviation will not be one that is looked back on fondly

General Davis sold his soul for the F-35 and I'd like to ask him if it was worth it.  Marine Corps historians will not be kind to his leadership during this period.  This maintenance mess and the poor state of Marine Corps aviation should be a chargeable offense.  The idea that national security was threatened because someone at HQMC decided that the operational risk of having 74% of our strike aircraft in an unserviceable state is almost treasonous!

Bad decisions?  You bet your ass!

The USMC hoped for budget boost is gone with the wind...

via Marine Corps Times

Despite President Trump’s promise for a massive military buildup, the Marine Corps is not expected to grow any more next fiscal year.

If approved by Congress, the proposed Marine Corps' fiscal 2018 budget will keep active-duty end strength at 185,000, budget documents show. Lawmakers recently approved funding for the Corps to grow from 182,000 to 185,000 this fiscal year.

Trump, on the campaign trail last year, publicly endorsed recommendations from the Heritage Foundation think tank calling for adding 12 active-duty Marine infantry battalions and one active-duty tank battalion.  

“We will build a Marine Corps based on 36 battalions, which the Heritage Foundation notes is the minimum needed to deal with major contingencies,” Trump said during a Sept. 7 speech, in which he called for a bigger U.S. military.

At this point, it is impossible to say whether future budgets will call for the Marine Corps to become larger, said retired Marine Lt. Col. Dakota Wood, the principal author of the Heritage Foundation’s review.

Although Trump has said he intends to increase the size of the military, and the House and Senate Armed Services committees have expressed support for the idea, other lawmakers do not want to increase defense spending without finding non-military spending cuts, Wood told Marine Corps Times Monday. 

Remember that budget boost that the Pentagon and HQMC lusted after?  Well it ain't gonna happen and with fiscal hawks holding sway over the defense hawks it seems like it will never happen.

The funny thing is that the Pentagon has made it easy.  They can't even run a proper audit of the dept so who in their right mind would allocate them more resources until they can account for what they've already been given!

Cuts are coming boys and girls.

Unless Thornberry can pull a rabbit out of his ass then the F-35 will certainly be cut, as will the CH-53K.  I would even bet that the final multiyear buy of MV-22s will be reassessed.  HQMC made a bad bet it seems and now they're gonna reap the whirlwind.

Sidenote!  There is one thing the Marine Corps can try but its gonna be hard to explain to the Congress.  They can close bases and reduce the size of the force.  If they revert back to the original plane of 150K Marines and give up Miramar then maybe they can find the funds to buy all the toys they want.

Modernized ATACMs successfully tested..

via UPI

Lockheed Martin reports its modernized Tactical Missile System missile has successfully completed a sixth long-range flight test.

The surface-to-surface TACMS missile flew about 149 miles to engage its target. The flight test at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico confirmed that the missile functions as designed and meets performance requirements of the U.S. Army's TACMS Service Life Extension Program, Lockheed Martin said..

"During this test, we demonstrated a successful proximity detonation of the TACMS missile, as well as confirmed numerous performance improvements to these rounds," said Scott Greene, vice president of Precision Fires & Combat Maneuver Systems at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. "This sixth consecutive success further demonstrates that our customers can have full confidence that Modernized TACMS is going to perform reliably when called upon."

Lockheed said the missile used in the test was launched from a High Mobility Artillery Rocket System and was "hot-conditioned" -- the launcher was held in an environmental chamber before launch to simulate hot launch conditions.

The modernized TACMS features new guidance electronics and can engage a target without leaving behind unexploded ordnance.

I still wonder if the 7 ton Truck could handle the standard MLRS rocket pod.  If it can then we're leaving capability on the table.

Has the artillery community even considered it?

Juniper Falcon 2017 pics...

Breaking! Threat level raised in the UK to critical...more attacks expected! UPDATE!

Just heard this.

British PM says that more attacks are expected and those attacks are imminent!

UPDATE!

PM says that armed troops will be deployed on the street.  News Reporters says this is unusual for the Brits.  It happens all over Europe and even the US but for the Brits this shows an unusual case of dread.  They're expecting pain.