Wow.
Why does it look so much "neater" than the Brit example?
Tuesday, July 03, 2018
Is NATO worth keeping?
via Defense News.
The Pentagon is reportedly analyzing the costs and repercussions associated with a “large-scale withdrawal” or a “transfer of American troops stationed in Germany,” the Washington Post reported Friday.All this is part of a larger narrative.
The Post’s report was based on interviews with U.S. officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity, but who are reportedly familiar with the assessment.
The U.S. officials emphasized that the assessment is an analysis exercise and is currently limited to exploring options internally.
Top military leaders are not involved, and the Pentagon has not been tasked with taking steps to execute any option, according to the Post.
* The EU spends too little on defense.
* NATO was designed to deal with an enemy that no longer exists.
* EU Defense, NATO, and individual countries have commands that overlap and mirror.
Long short?
NATO as its currently constructed is inefficient.
NATO was built to counter the Soviet Bloc. That Bloc is gone and in addition for every NATO command the EU Defense Group (Dept or whatever they call it) relies on the same units to fulfill the same roles.
Let's be honest.
NATO serves only one purpose.
To tie the US to Europe. It's past time someone did a real assessment of whether that continues to make sense.
Side note. The sad reality is this. Planning to fight Russia is easy. The infrastructure is setup, the allies set and the ground prepared. So instead of planning for the probable fight against China, which will be hard as hell because all the enabling conditions have not been established, we see many defaulting to the politically expedient foe instead of the likely one. Will we pay a price for laziness?
Mattis compares the UK UNFAVORABLY with France!
via The Guardian.
The US defence secretary, James Mattis, has made a surprise intervention in the row over UK defence spending by warning France could replace the UK as Washington’s closest military ally in Europe.Story here.
In a leaked letter to the British defence secretary, Gavin Williamson, Mattis expressed concern the UK’s military power was at risk of erosion and compared the UK unfavourably with France, which Mattis pointed out had committed to significant increases in defence spending.
“As global actors, France and the US have concluded that now is the time to significantly increase our investment in defense. Other allies are following suit,” he said.
“It is in the best interest of both our nations for the UK to remain the US partner of choice.”
This is a brutal shot across the bow of the UK defense establishment.
The moderate and much loved US Sec Of Def has outright stated that France could replace the UK as our closest military ally in Europe?
Brutal doesn't quite describe things!
I asked if the UK could still be considered a first rate military power and many wondered why I would even ask such a thing...of course they're first rate.
But what do you say now?
Add BREXIT to the mix and the UK is in a hurt locker.
One caveat though.
This could all be a game to help the UK Ministry of Defence get their plus up in spending passed by Parliament. Mattis has shown that he is well versed in playing the political game and I seriously doubt that a letter like this would leak unless that was the intention.
But even if its gamesmanship, this is still a wild card to be pulled and potentially demoralizing to the British people.
Singapore's F-16 replacement...the usual suspects plus 1?
via Defense News.
Singapore will decide in the next few months on a new fighter to replace its fleet of Lockheed Martin F-16 multirole fighters, with the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter from the same manufacturer seen as the prime candidate.Story here.
In an interview with media ahead of the southeast Asian island nation’s Armed Forces Day, Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen said that despite ongoing upgrades, the F-16s face obsolescence beyond 2030. He added the country will make a definitive decision on its replacement in the next few months based on interoperability with Singapore’s current systems and platforms as well as the price.
Ng refused to be drawn into further details as to which fighter platforms Singapore is looking at, only saying that the BAE Systems Typhoon, the F-35, Russia’s Sukhois, and Chinese-made stealth fighters are “the usual suspects that you have to look at” when air forces are choosing a new combat platform.
I wonder.
Could Singapore be looking at the usual suspects PLUS the Saab Gripen?
I ask because I've noticed an EXTREME practicality and HUGE DESIRE for independence when it comes to their defense systems.
Have you noticed it?
Ship building? Almost all local. Armored vehicles? The same. Energy production? They're working overtime to remove every possible vulnerability. Food? The same. Water? Ditto.
So why would a country that is working so hard for independence on every scale possible suddenly decide to slave themselves to Lockheed Martin's ALIS contraption?
Why would they make themselves a slave to a global supply chain that could easily be disrupted?
I don't think they will.
I think performance is negotiable with their selection. I believe that the freedom to put whatever avionics they want and to build as much of the plane as they want locally will be the driving force.
I know what you're saying.
You're saying this doesn't apply with their Air Force because we can look to the F-15 deal as an example. They have a large fleet of them and many are here in the US constantly training.
I'm betting that was then and this is now. Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen is almost ruthless when it comes to Singapore defense needs. I get the impression that he's identified vulnerabilities and is seeking to stomp them out with an efficiency that would make the biggest OCD sufferer blush in amazement and jealousy.
Long story short.
I don't see them acting on the promise of the F-35 ironing out its problems. This is the F-16 replacement and I'm thinking that he will want this done sooner rather than later.
The F-35 could be selected by them but I'll bet it comes later in the 2020's almost near the end or on 2030. No rush for them on that beat.
One other thing.
Singapore's defense ministry truly acts as a DEFENSE ministry. Offensive actions are not part of how they operate. Penetrating strike fighters isn't really a main need. Maritime strike...air defense...air superiority...those ring the bell first for them and they're all based on defending the city state, not seeking to conquer others.
I think this decision will stun.
Raytheon is Building a 100kW Tactical Laser
via Defense Update.
Raytheon Company is developing a 100 kW class laser weapon system under a $10 million U.S. Army’s High Energy Laser Tactical Vehicle Demonstration (HEL TVD) program contract. The preliminary design will be integrated for demonstration onboard a military Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) truck. The science and technology demonstration program is part of the Army’s Indirect Fire Protection Capability (IFPC) Increment 2 Block 2 (IFPC 2-I Blk 2) initiative designed to defeat drones, rockets, artillery, and mortars (C-RAM/UAS).
The Army’s Indirect Fire Protection Capability, Increment 2 — Intercept (IFPC Inc 2-I) is an acquisition program designed to provide a material solution to protect troops from cruise missiles, unmanned aerial systems (UAS), and rockets, artillery, and mortars (RAM). IFPC Inc 2-I has a Block 2 milestone decision in FY24 to add the counter-RAM capability to the program. To date, the program tested lasers at various intensities, from 2kW to 50 kW. In February this year, Lockheed Martin announced it completed the development of a single-beam 60 kW laser for the program. The 100 kW laser will be based on multi-beam fiber-laser design. The next phase will test the system with 100kW lasers, deemed adequate to defeat C-RAM targets in a timely manner.
Following the conclusion of the test and evaluation phase in early 2019 the Army plans to award a three-year system development, and demonstration contract estimated at $130 million, to build and integrate a weapon system. By the Fiscal year 2022, the HEL TVD will be demonstrated against a variety of targets, including lethal engagements.
This capability is managed in parallel to the Interim Mobile-SHORAD (IM-SHORAD) that will equip the Stryker brigades beginning 2020, but the two programs could be merges sometime in the future as the Army considers adding HEL capability to IM-SHORAD in the future.
The first mission is to protect U.S. and allied forces at fixed and semi-fixed bases. High energy lasers will complement conventional offensive and defensive weapons at a significantly lower cost per engagement than current systems. The high energy laser system represents very low operating costs, as it requires only fuel to complete its mission, with an average cost per kill of approximately $30. There is no ordnance logistics burden, as with conventional weapons.
US Navy set to receive 39 CMV-22B's...
via Press Release.
Bell Boeing is being awarded a contract conversion in support of the V-22 aircraft. The conversion into a fixed-price-incentive-fee multiyear contract is valued at $4.1 billion and provides for the manufacturer and delivery of 78 V-22s. Under the contract the Navy will receive 39 CMV-22Bs, 34 MV-22Bs are marked for the Marine Corps, the US Air Force will receive 1 CV-22B and the government of Japan will take delivery of 4 MV-22Bs. V-22 Initial Operational Capability didn’t begin until 2007, about 24 years after the initial design contract. A long series of design issues and mass-fatality crashes almost got the program canceled, but Congressional industrial lobbying preserved it. This modification combines purchases for the Navy ($2,8 billion); Marine Corps ($1,03 billion); Air Force ($75,7 million); and the government of Japan ($230,2 million), under the Foreign Military Sales program. Work will be performed at various locations inside and outside the continental US. Locations include Fort Worth, Texas; East Aurora, New York; Rockford, Illinois. It is expected to be completed by November 2024.
About that VBCI that got hit with a vehicle borne IED...
A few points need to be made about the VBCI that got with a vehicle borne IED....
1. The vehicles obviously stood up. No killed just injured ... at least when it comes to French troops.
2. We need to hold our applause. We don't know the size of the bomb. The fact that they were operating in what passes for at least a "semi-urban area" and the fact that civilian casualties weren't astronomical indicates that it wasn't as large as those that have been seen in Iraq at the height of the fighting there.
3. We need to hold our applause. No vehicle, including the VBCI, that acts as an infantry fighting vehicle or APC can withstand some of the larger VBIEDs that are out there.
4. The French are following what appears to be standard Western counter insurgency planning. They're operating where the "human terrain" is located. The idea goes back to the Vietnam war. Protect the population, influence the population, provide assistance to the population and after awhile the population will "come over to the side" of freedom, democracy and Western style capitalism. These are religious based conflicts. That doesn't apply. Instead we're endangering the population because we're not in the countryside hunting these people down and leaving local authorities to police their cities.
Overall I'd say the vehicle performed but we need to know more. This isn't a chest thumping event. It's simply another act of war. Murphy got to make his call and luckily more people weren't killed or injured, but the fact remains that the enemy will learn and they will scale up. Next time they'll build a bomb big enough to take out a VBCI. That's just a fact.
General Dynamics Flyer 72 wins big Army contract...
via Mil Embedded.com
General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems has won a $33.8 million contract from the U.S. Army Contracting Command to produce Army Ground Mobility Vehicles (AGMV) and associated kits.
The AGMV -- based on the GMV1.1 vehicle General Dynamics is currently supplying to the U.S. Department of Defense -- is designed to carry an airborne infantry squad and has a payload capability of over 5,000 pounds. It shares approximately 90 percent of its parts with the GMV1.1 and meets the same strategic-lift requirements.
The AGMV, says General Dynamics, can be modified to accept already developed kit configurations such as remote and manned turrets, armor, and arctic kits.
The contract is estimated to be completed by March 2019.
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)