End of Active Fucks (EAF) date...Terminal Lance does it again!

Too awesome.  

Gotta meet that dude someday.  Terminal Lance is hilarious...must get him drunk!

Armor Porn. My favored ground mobility vehicle for the Marines and Airborne Forces, the Oshkosh S-ATV...

I've looked at them all and this is my favorite for the ground mobility vehicle for Marines and Airborne Forces.  It's light, mobile, provides adequate armor and when coupled with the right operating concept should be more than adequate...the thing should rock.  Internal carriage by V-22's?  Don't know but quite honestly don't care.  If we're doing it right then you're gonna sling this under CH-53's or CH-47's, move them in along with artillery...zip in, hit hard and zip out...with a huge dose of Marine/Navy Air in overwatch in the skies above (USAF can play too...even the Army if they want to send along some AH-64E's)....

Open Comment Post. May 11, 2018

Kill and/or capture is just not working in the war on terror....

via Military Times.

U.S. and Somali commandos seized three men thought to be commanders with the al-Shabab extremist group during a deadly raid in a village in Lower Shabelle region, Somali intelligence officials said Thursday.

Five people thought to be banana farmers were killed in the raid late Wednesday and several others were captured, Moalim Ahmed Nur, a traditional elder in the village, told The Associated Press.

A Somali intelligence official said the forces targeted a key hideout and coordination center for the Somalia-based al-Shabab. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

The U.S. Africa Command did not immediately comment on the raid. The U.S. has stepped up military efforts against al-Shabab, the deadliest Islamic extremist group in sub-Saharan Africa, under the Trump administration.

Story here. 

Amazing.

Want to see theories/concepts that don't work?  This should be at the top of the list when it comes to our war on terror.

How long have we been killing and/or capturing terror leaders?

How many high risk missions have we mounted to do the same?

Do you see a degrading of terror capability with all this effort?

I'm sorry to say I can't.  I've said they're starting to operate like nation state armies and we're seeing a conventional approach on their part when leadership is killed.

The next man steps up.

Five terrorists were captured in either Iraq or Afghanistan, I can't remember.  Awesome.  We hear about this raid.  Good.

But is this helping us get to our desired end state?  I just don't think so.

I don't even know what this chunky Saab plane is but I like it!

Damn!  I might be turning into a Saab fanboy or more accurately I'm seriously falling in love with the old skool jets.

Something about them just looks so right to me!  Much more to come from other manufacturers soon.

That plane is chunky and funky but cool as FUCK!

Snake Head Cupola MK III

via Army Recognition.

At SOFEX 2018, the International Special Operations Forces Exhibition & Conference, the Jordanian Defense Company Jordan Amco presents a new version of its fully armoured turret Snake Head Cupola MK III fitted with optronics to perform combat operations during day and night conditions.

At DSEI 2017, a defense exhibition in London, Jordan AMCO has displayed its new upgraded Snake Head Cupola MK III, a fully closed armoured cupola fitted on a hybrid ring mount with 13 vision blocks, enabling the gunner to have wide surveillance angles of the perimeter around the vehicle.

The MKIIIA cupola is equipped with a front shield fitted on the weapon mount. The shield moves up and down providing the gunner full protection in the area around the gun barrel in addition to a curved vision block to enhance gunners’ vision.

At SOFEX 2018, Jordan Amco unveils a new version of its Snake Head Cupola MKIIIA fitted with day and night vision optronics and a laser range finder mounted at the front of the turret. With this new optics, Jordan Amco offers a new generation of fully armoured turret with high level of accuracy which can be used during day and night operations.

The Snake Head Cupola MK III can be easily integrated to any types of light wheeled and tracked armoured vehicles. The turret can offer ballistic protection up to Level 2 STANAG 4569. It can be armed with a variety of weapons, including machine gun up to 12.7mm caliber with manual traverse of 360° and manual elevation from -10° to +35°. According the request of customers, the turret can also be electrically powered.

I've been looking for low profile cupolas and/or turrets for awhile now.  The stuff we've been seeing is good but size and weight reductions are LONG overdue.

I don't know the tech behind this stuff but I would think they could push harder to deliver what I just described.

We need smaller.  We need lighter.  We need the capability to mount whatever weapon is desired...and we need under armor reloading, clearing and even light maintenance of the system.

Is that asking too much?

But back to this offering.  It's smaller than the offering that gained widespread use after the USAF Security guy got hit in Iraq (don't remember his name but I know the Air Force pushed out a new cupola with a quickness that was widely adopted). It provides overhead protection.  It's a step in the right direction.  Below is the version without the optics/day/night sights.  Jordan is making steps, not as big as others but steady forward progress.  I'm pleased.

Flyer-based vehicle to give 173rd Airborne troops speed on the ground

Thanks to Jonathan for the link!

via Stripes.

 The 173rd Airborne Brigade is expecting to get new ground vehicles that can climb hills, ford streams and enable a speedy exit from a drop zone.

The brigade is one of the five airborne brigades scheduled to receive the Ground Mobility Vehicle, a high-performance, four-wheel drive vehicle based on the Flyer Advanced Light Strike Vehicle, sometime next year.

The Flyers, used in the past few years by special operations forces, have a turbocharged diesel 2-liter engine generating 195 horsepower. Their top speed is listed at 95 mph.

“What that means is we can get to our objective faster and more lethally,” said Maj. Christopher Bradley, a brigade spokesman.

Bradley said the brigade would learn more details — including when the vehicles would arrive and how many they’ll get — at the end of the year.

“We’re expecting the initial fielding next spring,” he said. “Soldiers like to hear that their long walking trips might be minimized.”

Speed is of the essence for airborne troops. The 173rd Airborne Brigade is supposed to be able to deploy within 18 hours, parachuting out of planes to do so if necessary.

“The faster we can get people in — that gives our political leaders some options,” then-U.S. Army Europe commander Lt. Gen Ben Hodges said during a 2016 NATO exercise in Spain that culminated in a parachute drop from C-17 aircraft. “That’s the most important thing: speed gives political leaders options.”

But once paratroopers hit the ground, things slow down. “Most of the time paratroopers walk,” Bradley said. “The vast majority of the time, we move out without vehicles.”

The $271,000 Flyer, developed by General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems, can accommodate nine soldiers, the size of a typical infantry rifle squad. It can take them up a 60-degree grade, across water up to 30 inches deep and through a rollover.

It has a range of 300 miles and Army officials touted the vehicle’s suspension for its smooth ride.

“It’s great for soldiers riding in a vehicle for a long period of time,” Bradley said. Flyers are also designed to support modern communications systems, he said.

Army photos show Flyers equipped with an M2 .50-caliber heavy machine gun and an M240 7.62 mm medium machine gun.

The vehicles can be converted into lightly armored vehicles with modular panels.

The Flyer was designed to provide special operations forces with a lightweight vehicle that could be airdropped — from C-130s and larger aircraft, as well as CH-47 Chinook helicopters and Ospreys — and be configured for a variety of missions.

 Mass combat jumps, however, have been rare since World War II and the increased use of helicopters to insert troops.

The 82nd Airborne Division made its first combat jump in more than 40 years in 1989 during the U.S. invasion of Panama. The 173rd has jumped into combat twice in more than five decades — once in Vietnam and once in Iraq.

Consequently, some experts have questioned the utility of airborne troops in modern warfare, especially against opponents with sophisticated anti-aircraft defenses.

But a 2014 RAND Corp. study said that airborne forces, “unique in their ability to quickly deploy worldwide,” could be made more capable by including light armored vehicles in drops.

The study said a historical survey of airborne operations since 1989 demonstrated the value of quickly deployable forces.

The analysis concluded that dropping vehicles with airborne troops would “increase speed, mobility, and survivability.”

Where did this new meta come from?

Deep strikes...Airborne operations...long distance stuff with light vehicles?

EVERYONE is so enamored with "increased speed, mobility and SUPPOSEDLY survivability" that they've lost sight of the reality.

These vehicles won't protect against small arms fire.  A couple of primitives wearing sandals firing RPGs and machineguns can smash them beyond recognition.

Three hundred miles is good but what happens when you need to refuel?  You just added to your logistics burden in a huge way.

Yeah you have the benefit of not dropping on your objective but now you have to conduct a deliberate assault on that same fortified location not from the top down and hopefully inside out, but now from the outside in and probably against anticipated lines of attack.

All they're doing is changing the angle of the meat grinder. 

You're not dropping into it, instead you're now driving into it.

I guess my main gripe is that we're seeing a push for gear that doesn't seem to have a real application.  It's cool.  Probably fun as hell.  But does it make military sense? Is this another case of following a meme instead of actually crunching numbers and deciding if it really fits?

I'm just not sure the juice is worth the squeeze.

I guess it really doesn't matter.  If it doesn't work then there will be tons of lightly used Army/Marine Corps ATVs for sale to civilians. 

The most important news today...

USMC Armed Recon Vehicle...please don't mess this up!

via AOL Breaking Defense.

By 2023, the Marine Corps wants prototypes for a radically new scout unit they want to be the ground version of the F-35 — scouting ahead into hostile territory, killing key targets, and feeding data back to the rest of the force. Though called the Armored Reconnaissance Vehicle, the project has evolved well beyond a straightforward replacement for the aging Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) into a networked family of manned vehicles, ground robots, and drones, collectively capable of not only reconnaissance but also electronic warfare and long-range precision strikes.

Story here. 

I have been monitoring this thing and I'm a bit 'worried'.  They're talking about a tremendous amount of capability stuffed in one package, and this has the smell of being a program of emphasis.  By that I can easily see this being the lead ground program very shortly.

Concerns?

1.  Mission overload.  They're gonna be tasked with electronic warfare, operating UAVs, and engaging enemy forces (to include armored vehicles) as well as traditional recon/cav roles of scouting for the enemy, protecting flanks etc....?

2.  Networking.  I get the mantra.  I understand the desire but I am a bit worried about the vulnerability of these networks.  Time will tell if these concerns are warranted.

3.  Traditional mission set.  As soon as you start piling on missions to a particular vehicle it becomes a master of none.  What happens to the LAVs traditional mission sets?  Do they become second fiddle to UAV operations and electronic warfare?  If that's the case then why even put them in armored vehicles?  Just use a JLTV or better yet an a MTVR to give the operators of those systems a bit of room?

They talked about this possibly being a repeat of the F-35 or FCS projects and I think they might have a point.

Keep an eye on this one tribe!

But to be honest I just have doubts and really nothing to base it on, so all I have to say to the bubbas at HQMC is this.  Please don't mess this up!

Open Comment Post. May 10, 2018