Did Representative Rob Wittman let out a detail most missed about the ACV buy?

We've all read articles by elected officials championing the need for this or that defense system.  It's as common as high dollar hookers in the DC area.  So when I saw that Defense One had an article penned by Representative Rob Wittman of Virginia, I thought nothing of it.

Read it here.

One thing did catch my eye and if the comments are to be taken at face value then most missed it.  Check this part out...

Last month, BAE Systems won a contract to provide new amphibious combat vehicles to the Marine Corps. Thirty of these ACVs are scheduled for delivery by the end of 2019, and the Marine Corps will procure more than 800 vehicles over the next several years, phasing them in to replace its current amphibious assault vehicles, or AAVs. The new vehicle is designed to swim from ships up to 12 miles offshore, bringing 13 Marines and a crew of three from water to ground operations without a tactical pause. This upgrade to the AAVs improves survivability, lethality, and range.

Unless his Aides jumbled the numbers badly then we got a piece of some very interesting news!

If I recall correctly the buy was suppose to be for 200 with upgraded AAVs forming the remainder of the lift needed to transport Marines.

This flips everything on its head.

If the Representative is to be believed then the Marine Corps has decided that the ACV fits the bill for the foreseeable future and they're going to be a straight replacement for the AAV now.

It does lead to some interesting questions though.

*  Has the BAE/IVECO Superav met all the test points for the so called ACV 1.2?

*  What becomes of the ACV 2.0 (or is it 1.3...can't remember)?  Will they still pursue a tracked vehicle with high water speed in the 2030s?

*  If they're sold on the ACV 1.0 does that mean that they've come up with a high speed sled to quicken the pace of ship to shore movements?  Has instream launches of the ACV from the JLTV proven successful?

Everyone got into the usual catfight about amphibious assaults (which I can't stand...they'll question amphibious assault but think that airborne or heliborne assaults are more survivable---and without preparation!) but missed the 900 pound gorilla sitting in the corner (or rather the news that the buy will be for 800 instead of 200 ACVs!).

Amazing but not surprising considering the usual commentary with regard to military issues on the net.

Open Comment Post. July 27, 2018

HMAS Adelaide conducts night operations with U.S. Marine Corps AH-1Z Cobras, UH-1Y Hueys during RIMPAC....Pic by Petty Officer 2nd Class Kelsey Hockenberger

I've been monitoring the conversation that a few Aussies have been having on the blog.

If what they're saying is true then they will have an impressive Army in just a few years.  Capable across the board when it comes to land tasks.  Considering the quality of the average Digger in comparison to other troops in the region I'd say they'll be extremely formidable.

The above pic bothers me though.

The lack of Aussie aircraft on that big sparkling deck is worrying.  I know its going to take time.  I know that they're doing it by the numbers.

But as things stand now we can add the HMAS Adelaide to our amphibious shipping numbers.  We'll get a chance to use it to greater effect than the Aussie Army unless they pick up the pace...and of course assuming they allow us to use it.

Israel to buy F-15, KC-767, V-22 and CH-47!

via Times of Israel.

The Israeli Air Force is planning its largest-ever acquisition in an $11 billion deal being negotiated with the US aircraft manufacturer Boeing.

The deal appears set to include a squadron of F-15 jets with upgraded stealth features, a squadron of cargo helicopters and aerial refueling planes, according to a report in the Israel Hayom daily.

The purchase will be funded from US military aid money, which comes to some $3.8 billion annually, over the next decade as the new planes and helicopters are delivered.

According to military officials, Israel’s Yas’ur cargo helicopters (otherwise known as the Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallions) and refueling planes are thought to be outdated, and their replacement has been a priority for the Air Force.

The Air Force favors replacing the aging squadrons with Boeing platforms over some of the company’s competitors for several reasons, the report says. Boeing’s refueling planes are based on the 767 passenger jet, have a proven record of reliability and can be delivered fairly quickly. Boeing’s helicopter lines, specifically the CH-47 Chinook and V-22 Osprey, mean a single procurement deal can deliver a helicopter squadron with more diverse capabilities.

Story here. 

THIS IS STUNNING!

We'll get to the F-15 buy but that's not what has me shocked.  It's the choice of the CH-47 instead of the CH-53K.

Sikorsky has touted the CH-53K as MUCH MORE than a cargo helicopter (even though its best in class in the West).  They've also claimed that with its avionics its capable of performing as a PENETRATION HELICOPTER to deliver troops into enemy airspace OUT THE BOX!

The Israelis obviously think otherwise.

Which brings me to the V-22 portion of the buy.  Capable airplane if you're not flying into a hot LZ.  It's fast and can fly far.  I imagine the Israelis will run into the same problems that the USMC is facing when it comes to developing an escort for the thing but its obvious that they're looking at inserting Special Ops teams (and extracting them) from far away. 

Let's not be silly.  The Israelis probably already have agents and Special Ops personnel running around Iran as we speak.  I'd even bet they have a few troops in Yemen helping out in that cluster fuck.

The 767 kinda mystifies me.  The Israelis have done tankers themselves.  Why buy one when they can simply build their own from surplus jets that they can easily obtain?

Onto the F-15.  This was telegraphed months ago when we first heard word that the Israelis might buy the F-15 instead of more F-35s.

Don't know what to make of this.

I instinctively want to run with the thought that the F-35 is being viewed as a unique capability and NOT the everyday of war jet that the USAF and USMC claim it to be.

If this is the case then they're viewing it in the F-117 category.  First day of war only.

Does this mean they've crunched the numbers and its not cost effective?  Do their tests reveal that they'd be better served by the F-15 when it comes to aerial combat?  It can't be about weapons load because the F-35 can damn near haul the same amount of munitions that the F-15 can.

Instinctively I get the vibe that this is about something that we don't have visibility on (save me the price thing...the USAF would practically give the Israelis F-35s especially since it would pump up production).

Waiting to learn more but this is an awesome win for Boeing, a stunning defeat for Sikorsky and a puzzle waiting to be solved.

Aviation Porn. Air Force Special Operations C-130 landing on dirt strip...

Aviation Porn. RNoAF AW101-612

Thurs Funny. Navy boot camp...like being married without the benefits...

A screeching female in your face and all you can do is sit there and take it?  Navy boot camp is like being married without the benefits....

Open Comment Post. July 26, 2018

Japan Defense Ministry studying how to carry F-35Bs on Izumo-class helicopter carriers

via Naval News
Japan Defense Ministry studying how to carry F-35Bs on Izumo-class helicopter carriers

Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera said his ministry is studying whether F-35B fighter jets can be deployed on Maritime Self-Defense Force helicopter carriers, a move likely to be viewed as yet another signal Japan is retreating from its strictly defense-oriented military posture.

Under the postwar Constitution, the government has maintained it cannot possess “attack aircraft carriers” because they are could be deemed offensive weapons exceeding the “minimum force” needed for Japan to protect itself.

Japan has flat-topped destroyers that carry helicopters, but not fighter aircraft.

The MSDF’s Izumo-class carriers are 248 meters long and can carry up to 14 helicopters. The F-35B is the U.S. Marine Corps variant of the F-35 Lightning, a next-generation stealth jet made by Lockheed Martin Corp. They are capable of making short takeoffs and vertical landings.

I stated it a while ago but the F-35B will be the most successful part of the JSF program.

There was a time when I attacked people for saying that the F-35B jacked up the development of the plane.  I still think that the blame for STOVL being included lies with Congress and not the Marine Corps...

But having said that its obvious that the only "leap ahead" capability found in this program is in the STOVL version.

Long story short?

The JSF program labored long and hard for an AV-8B replacement.

The reality?

The Marine Corps made a bitch of its sister services and allies.  We got an AV-8B replacement.  The jump jet concept will continue and is improved on with a supersonic F-35 (kinda expect the USMC to strip the stealth coating and to fly with pylons).  Everyone else got substandard F-16 replacements. 

The Corps won, everyone else loses.

NIJ's revised body armor standard!!!

Thanks to Jonathan for the link!

via Police One.

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) currently is revising its standards for the testing and certification of ballistic protection gear. NIJ Standard 0101.07 – which will replace NIJ Standard 0101.06 – is expected to be rolled out by the end of 2018. What do these changes mean to law enforcement?

More standard standards

The NIJ is working with other government agencies to ensure that they are all following the same playbook. This means that NIJ, the U.S. Army, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and others have been cooperating to harmonize laboratory test procedures and practices in ASTM Subcommittee E54.04, which addresses personal protective equipment (PPE).

One of the best changes in the new version is that the threat levels have been renamed from unintelligible Roman numerals like II and IIIA to HG1 and HG2, and from III and IV to RF1 and RF3. A new intermediate RF2 was added. The lowest soft armor threat level called IIA – which includes 9mm at 1225 ft/s and .40 S&W – was dropped from the new standard. Bonus points for figuring out what HG and RF stand for – much easier, right?

Another important change is that the test round velocities for conditioned armor (simulating that it has been worn) are now the same as those for new armor. For example, Level IIIA specifies that the .44 Magnum round is shot at 1340 ft/s for conditioned armor and at 1430 ft/s for new armor. In the new standard, the velocity for both conditioned and new armor is the same at 1430 ft/s. 9mm goes from 1245 conditioned1305 new to 1305 ft/s for both. More like real life, and also raising the bar for body armor manufacturers.

More or less to read

Unlike the current and previous versions of the NIJ standard, which are comprehensive standalone documents, revision 7 will be made shorter by incorporating a substantial amount of information either by reference or by moving it to annexes.

Of little interest to police, but of great interest to the testing labs, is a discussion of test barrels. In revision 7, the discussion has been removed and a reference to external documents published by the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI) takes its place.

Because of the threat level changes, the missing section discussing the ballistic threat levels identified by U.S. law enforcement with associated ammunition is a must-read before issuing your next contract.

Some changes make the document harder to read, but more detailed at the same time. For example, revision 6 has multiple tables that each list a stated requirement for all of the threat levels, such as fair hits. Revision 7 embeds the requirements in separate paragraphs, making rated level comparisons somewhat harder.

This is beyond good news.

I know many of you guys liked the old system but I've seen many guys rolling around in armor that could barely stand up to handgun fire (smaller caliber at that)...I personally blamed it on the naming convention. 

Roman numerals to denote the capability to stand up to X round?

That made no sense to me.

Now?

Now no one has an excuse for wearing substandard armor.  If a dept won't pay for a vest that can stand up when hit by a large caliber pistol round you have no one to blame but yourself for not digging into pocket!

About time NIJ.  Well done.