British Sub Shooting.

To be honest I was waiting for Grand Logistics or Think Defence or heck even Information Dissemination to do a story on this sub shooting.

Hasn't happened yet so this is the news so far...

1 dead after shooting aboard UK nuclear sub

By JILL LAWLESS, Associated Press Jill Lawless, Associated Press Fri Apr 8, 4:47 pm ET

LONDON – A British sailor aboard a nuclear-powered submarine apparently shot dead a crew member and seriously wounded another Friday while the vessel was on a goodwill visit to an English port, officials said.
The suspect was overpowered by colleagues and visiting dignitaries aboard HMS Astute and arrested on suspicion of murder.
Police and military officials said the incident was not related to terrorism, but offered few details about what may have prompted a sailor to open fire during a tour of the submarine by local officials, including the mayor of Southampton, in southern England.
Britain's Press Association news agency reported the dead and injured crewmen were officers, and the suspect a sentry armed with an SA80 service rifle. Submariners do not routinely carry loaded firearms aboard ships, but those on sentry duty are armed.
Southampton city council leader Royston Smith said he was in the submarine's control room when a man entered, said something, then retreated to a corridor. Two shots rang out before the man walked back in and opened fire.
"I decided the best form of defense at that point was probably to disarm the chap," Smith told the BBC.
Smith said he and others managed to wrestle the gun away from the suspect and subdue him.
Hampshire Police Chief Superintendent David Thomas said only that a gun went off aboard the submarine, "which resulted in two crew members being injured."
"One of these injuries proved fatal. A man, also a member of the Royal Navy, was arrested at the scene on suspicion of murder," Thomas said. "Submarine security was not breached as part of this incident and it is not terrorist-related."
He said the wounded sailor's injuries were "significant," but his condition was stable.
The Defense Ministry said it would not release the names of the dead and injured until their families had been informed.
Defense Secretary Liam Fox said he was saddened by the "tragic incident."
Police said they were called to the shooting just after 12 p.m. (1100 GMT, 7:00 a.m. EDT). They said all of the approximately 30 people aboard the submarine at the time would be interviewed as witnesses.
The submarine, which is based in Scotland, was on a five-day visit to Southampton.
The 1 billion pound ($1.6 billion) vessel is one of Britain's fleet of 11 nuclear-powered submarines, armed with Spearfish torpedoes and Tomahawk cruise missiles. Its reactor is designed to last for the vessel's 25-year operational life, meaning it will never need to be refueled.
The 328-foot-long (100-meter-long) submarine's short career has been dogged by problems. Originally, due to enter service in 2005, it began active duty in 2010, years behind schedule and millions of dollars over budget.
In October, the Astute hit rocks and ran aground near the Isle of Skye off the west coast of Scotland. It was stuck for several hours until it was towed to safety. The vessel's commander was later removed from his post.
The Defense Ministry said it planned to open a Royal Navy investigation into Friday's shooting.

Ships traditionally had detachments of Marines on board to provide both external AND internal security.  I don't know if its ever been done on submarines.  After this incident it might be time to consider it.

Recovery of crashed Helo in Hawaii.

Remember this a couple of weeks ago? 



Well the recovery effort has been mounted and the helicopter recovered...

Navy sailors from Mobile Diving Salvage Unit 1, Company 15, clear the extraction point in Kaneohe Bay where a CH-53D Sea Stallion is lifting another CH-53D back to Marine Corps Air Station Kaneohe Bay on April 8. The halved helicopter was forced to make an emergency landing in the bay March 29 and killed one of the crewmen and injured the other three.

Marines and sailors pull on a cargo strap to swing and align a hoisted section of a CH-53D Sea Stallion helicopter onto an awaiting truck. The halved helicopter was cut to make removal from Kaneohe Bay easier after it was forced to make an emergency landing March 29 which killed one Marine and injured three others and terminally damaged the aircraft.

A CH-53D Seal Stallion helicopter form Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 363 returns half of a sea stallion helicopter to Marine Corps Air Station Kaneohe Bay on April 8. Workers cut the helicopter in half after it made an emergency landing in Kaneohe Bay March 29 emergency landing in the bay March 29 and killed one of the crewmen and injured the other three.

Good cause ... spotty execution.

Like the title says...good cause.  Not sure how walking a mile in women's pumps is something you want your warriors to be doing though.

Not sure how well something like this would go down in the Marines.  Not the cause, but the execution...the event...the asking Marines to put on women's shoes and walk a mile.  Thank God this was an Air Force event.

 

Warrior Song.

Make sure you visit Warrior Project YouTube Channel

PRT Meymaneh

PRT Meymaneh's FLICKR stream from Sept of last year.  No updates.  Nothing.  I don't think they've pulled out of Afghanistan yet so I'm not sure what the deal is.  If you know then hit me up.

Robert Work talks Marine Corps future.

via DefenseNews.com
Read the whole thing but this is the part that covers the Marines.

Q. The Marines are thinking ahead to where they're going to be post-Afghanistan. How do you see the shape of the Corps ten years from now?

A. The Corps structure review group that was set up by Commandant Gen. James Amos has finished. It was a bottom-up review to look at all the different things they were told to in the most recent quadrennial defense review and defense planning guidance. They come up with the 186,800 person Marine Corps. Now, they're a force of readiness. That's their key role. And the Secretary of Defense endorsed that role.
The plan is, depending on resources of course, to be manned very close to 100 percent as possible. They would have an entirely modernized and upgraded ground mobility portfolio based on two new systems - the Marine Corps personnel carrier and the new amphibious vehicle. Our hope is that we can get have eight battalions of the new amphibious vehicle and four battalions of the Marine personnel carrier.
The Marines have already dropped the total number of vehicles in their Marine Air-Ground Task Force, forcewide, from 42,000 to about 32,500, and they did that by essentially matching butts to seats. And they said how do we keep mobility in the ground force? They are looking at their joint light tactical fleet, what's the best way forward, should it be the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle or should there be some other option? They've looked at their medium truck fleet. I think they're in real good shape.
Aviation looks very bright. The secretary, the commandant and I are very confident that the engineering problems on the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter are going to be resolved. The Marines have made a decision to put five F-35C [carrier variant] squadrons aboard carriers, so they have lined up about 21 active squadrons, five of them C's, the remainder of them B's.

[Development of] the CH-53K [heavy-lift helicopter] is moving right along, and we're extremely happy with the AH-1Z [attack helicopters] and the UH-1Y [utility helicopter].

So when we take a look at a force in readiness, able to come from the sea, the plan is in place for a thoroughly modernized Marine Corps and thoroughly ready Marine Corps, going back to its naval roots and its amphibious heritage.

Q. Is naval fire support something in need of a solution or is the current capability acceptable?

A. In '13, we hope to take a look again at the 5-inch guided round, but the 6-inch guided round, the 155mm is going well. It's already met its threshold in range. The plans are to have three DDG 1000 destroyers carrying six of those systems.
We have an awful lot of 5-inch cannons in the fleet and if we can solve the 5-inch round problem, then the combination of the 6-inch rounds, 5-inch rounds and air-delivered ordnance is going to be plenty for any foreseeable contingencies.

Q. Production of LPD 17 San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ships is continuing, with half the class is already in service and the sixth ship to be delivered this summer. Every previous ship has had problems to varying degrees. Shipbuilder Huntington-Ingalls Industries (HII) would really like to deliver a good ship, but they haven't done so yet. Do you see anything on this next ship that gives you hope?

A. We've had an awful lot of problems with the class, but the most recent ships are coming in in much better shape. We're still working with HII, we still want to see quality improve. As quality improves we expect scheduling and costs to improve.
But we're very satisfied with the basic design of the ship. Workmanship is getting better. We just awarded LPD 26 to HII, LPD 27 is a 2012 ship, and we'll start to worry about that once the budget is settled.
Sailors and Marines can't say enough about [the ships]. [U.S. Fleet Forces commander] Adm. John Harvey spends an awful lot of time trying to get that ship and the wellness of that class right and I think we've made great strides in doing so.

I just realized something while reading this entire article.

If I was a Sailor, I'd be downright pissed!

Think about it from their point of view.  The Marines are glorified passengers that do little aboard ship except take up space.  They're cargo.  Yet this minor service is taking up all the oxygen when it comes to discussions inside the Department of the Navy!

To say that a few months ago, it was fashionable to question the necessity of the Marines, its beyond refreshing to see that all of our major efforts are motoring right along.

For the Marines...life is hard, but life is good.

PS.

F-35 foes...read the part covering Marine aviation again.  How did Sheen say it?

Winning!

UPDATE:
I left off a part covering the USS America Class LHA...

Q. The biggest ship they're building right now on the Gulf coast is the assault ship America (lha 6). Will there be another lha without a well deck and an aviation version of that ship or is that going to be a one-off ship?

A. Nope, there will be two ships. LHA 7 will not have a well deck on it, and we'll have two aviation-capable ships.
Our intent is for LHA 8, which right now is a 2016 ship, to have a well deck in it. We're doing an analysis to determine the best and most inexpensive way for us to achieve that. Is it a repeat of the LHA 8 Makin class or is it an LHA with a well deck inserted into it? It's not going to be a completely newly-designed ship. It'll be a mod repeat of some type with a well deck in it.

Q. If it has a well deck, why isn't it called LHD 9?

A. That's a good question. I don't know whether that's been decided yet.

Libyan Forces fight NATO to a standstill.

I know what you're going to say.

This isn't an actual NATO loss...its a rebel failure.  NATO fought according to UN rules.

I know all that, but think about this sad fact.  As a military union, for whatever reason, NATO is 0-2.  A loss or draw in Afghanistan and a loss or draw in Libya.

The dumbest thing the former Soviet Union ever did was to NOT test Western military capabilities.  Conventionally we were at best on par...and no one had the guts to go nuclear.  Germany would have been conquered and the Nordic countries imperiled.

But back to this Libya thing.  If the madman can hold on long enough to start peace talks then he's won.  If he can be patient enough to martial his forces...do something silly to keep gas prices high without bringing down retaliatory strikes...is smart enough to keep his hands off international terrorism...then inside of a year he'll have regained all lost territory and no one will care.

Amazing.

Vehicle Neck-Down Campaign.

When it comes to the Ground Combat Element, we have a recurring issue that must be addressed.  That pesky little issue of what is the future of Tanks Battalions?

I believe we have a possible solution...but the solution leads to another question.  What about Light Armored Recon Battalions?

This whole issue is based on the Marine Personnel Vehicle.

In essence the USMC is about to acquire two personnel carriers...the first being the legacy AAV and its follow-on and then a new wheeled transport.

Why is this different from the way things have traditionally been done?  Quite simply because in the past, tactical transport was provided by the AAV (a tactical vehicle) and the MTVR (and before it the 5-ton truck), a logistics vehicle pushed into the tactical role.

The opportunity here is to decide exactly when, and where we will be using the heavy fire power of Tanks Battalion and if its necessary.

I believe it is but the opportunity to mount a 105mm gun to a wheeled platform can't be overlooked.  Additionally this could potentially lead to the Marine Corps being able to divest itself of the costly M1 Abrams, go to a lighter vehicle and incorporate all these vehicles into the AAV Battalions.  We have done something similar to this in the past with the LVTH-6.

If you can follow that reasoning then that leads to the LAR Battalions.  We are in essence going to have two separate wheeled combat vehicles (if General Dynamics doesn't win the contract).

That seems to be a waste of resources and a doubling of supply chains.  Trained mechanics that must be proficient on the MPC winner, the LAV-25A2 and a possible Hummer replacement (the Marines haven't announced if they're pulling out of that program) and now you have not two wheeled combat vehicles (depending on configuration) but three.

The idea is totally unsat.

Its time for a vehicle neck down campaign for the Ground Combat Element.  Cutting personnel might be a necessity, but cutting different vehicle types is a must.

UPDATE:

Let me be clear on an issue that Aussie Digger brought up.  My idea is that US Army Tank Detachments can be called upon when needed for heavy support.  How they decide to do it is up to them but I would probably push for 1 US Army Battalion of Tanks to be co-located with each Marine Division.  Lets face it.  Army Tank Battalions are looking for work, they can be easily attached and it would save us money.  Win win.