Infographic of the equipment ISIS captured

Thanks to Filippo for the link!

Wow.  This is looking like a bigger boondoggle for the Russians than I imagined.  They lost a battalion of tanks???  That's Iraqi like stupidity.  What were they thinking?

Islamic State blitzkrieg towards Tiyas Airbase

Thanks to Drinas for the link!



The above is an ISIS propaganda vid but did you catch a few things?  That tank looks brand new.  A couple of those technicals are new too.  Who is supplying these guys?  Is anyone actually fighting ISIS or are we just seeing a proxy war between the US/Coalition vs Russia/Syria/Iran?

Somewhere along the way someone lost sight of the real objective.  ISIS is the threat!  Why aren't we killing them????

SPECTRAL Trailer (2016) Netflix Sci-Fi Movie...I gotta see this!!!!

Thanks to Sam for the link!!!!



OH I GOT TO SEE THIS!  It's like Alien, Starship Troopers (the book not the movie) and Fallout 4 rolled into one.

BAE is on streak! They're rolling out the US Army's AMPV tomorrow!

Miss out on our ACV 1.1 ceremony live from Facebook yesterday? Good news is we’re going LIVE again tomorrow, but this time streaming our Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV) rollout ceremony! Tune in tomorrow around 11am to watch us roll out the first AMPV to the U.S. Army and hear firsthand what went into designing this robust, modern soluton.

Yep.  BAE is on a streak.  The possibility of winning the USMC ACV contract and they have the AMPV already in their backpocket?  I wonder how the stock is doing.

ROK Army - K-30 Biho 30mm + Missiles Anti-Aircraft Armoured Vehicles Live Firing

Why didn't we go with a simplified EFV?

John in an e-mail message laments about the offer from General Dynamics to provide the Marine Corps with a simplified EFV.  Remember this vehicle was ready to go and had been tested with Infantry Battalions, had been thru all climate testing and was shown to be shipboard compatible. High water speed would be stripped from the vehicle but the other bits would remain.  It would be a bit faster than the AAV, it would have tremendous firepower gains (you just can't sneeze at that 30mm setup they developed) and it would have all the comms and networking we could imagine.  Even better it would have already been in the fleet. I need real deal information.  No guesses allowed.  No conspiracy theories.

Why didn't we bite?

Spare me the talk about IEDs too.  According to John the EFV had MRAP protection that rivals the ACV so that can't be it.  Mobility?  I'm a track guy and while everyone is screaming that wheels offers the same mobility despite what I'm hearing and the example of the MTVR I'm gonna need to see more before I kill off that bias.

Its almost inexplicable.  A simplified EFV seems like a no brainer.  General Dynamics doesn't talk about it.  Marine Corps history ignores the issue and armor historians don't seem to know the controversy even exists.

So I ask again.  Why didn't the Marine Corps go with a simplified EFV?

Ok. Maybe police can't win.

Did you check out the above video?  This guy staged a scene with the help of some bubbas from the Mobile Police Dept and he surprised the hell outta his girlfriend by using them to propose to his future wife.

Instead of everyone cheering and saying way to go Mobile Police, that's some real good shit you instead have jack asses saying that its across the line.

Even when they're trying to do the right thing the police are getting shit on.  Maybe police can't win.

Personally I think this is fucking "cute" and cool as hell.  Good on all involved.

SIDENOTE!  If you're a proponent of community policing then this is it in action.  Being able to talk to police about even goofy shit is what its suppose to be about.  This is modern day Mayberry USA stuff you're seeing. Oh and for you nancies that are saying this was dangerous the LEOs pulled STUN GUNS.  The guy might have gotten a bit of a shock at worse but he was in no danger of death (if he's reasonably healthy and he looks solid) so chill out!

Open Comment Post. Dec 14, 2016

ACV questions answered and development path clarified.

I've been scouring the internet looking for information on how HQMC could be pushing the ACV as the solution to the ancient AAV while not delivering an increase in capability (at least on paper).  General Mullen (he's at 29 Palms now...poor bastard...I guess he went rogue and pissed in someone's Cheerios!) basically told me to "sit down, chill the fuck out cause they got this shit" and from my glance around the net I think he might have been right. Check this out from Armor and Mobility Mag.

"In the higher protection offered by the ACV such as added armor and underbelly configurations like a V-hull, the biggest distinguisher between what are likely to be two similarly-capable platforms is a better protection package and ground mobility offered by the ACV" 

So that answers that.

The thinking is that the ACV will offer better protection and ground mobility. The upgrade path has also been a matter of concern for many of my readers. I know the answer on this one from doing a little bit of scanning my brain housing group.  Remember ACV 1.1 was suppose to be just a protection upgrade (really didn't remember the increase in mobility being much talked about) but the ACV 1.2 was suppose to add the capability to swim from ship to shore.

If you think back you'll remember BAE/Iveco and SAIC/ST Kinetics both crowing about how their vehicles were already meeting that requirement (and the contract was constructed so that "extra points" were given for increased capabilities...that is over and beyond ACV 1.1 requirements).

Later the Program Office chimed in with the thinking that they would be getting a vehicle that could swim to shore and how ACV 1.2 requirements would be satisfied with this initial buy.

I tend to believe them on this point.

This leaves us with trying to figure out what ACV 1.3 is going to give us.  From my reading ACV 1.3 is going back to the EFV concept to determine if a true high water speed vehicle is technologically feasible.  Its suppose to be a follow on to ACV 1.3 work to attain even higher water speed while maintaining ground combat mobility and survivability.

ACV 2.0 is pure fiction.  We won't see it in our lifetime...by the time ACV 2.0 is achievable the Marine Corps will have moved to space combat and that will be our new ocean we have to swim (float-spacewalk-do extravehicular movements?) across.

Apologies if this is disjointed but I hope its clear.  ACV 1.1/1.2 in the form of the winner of this downselect will be the AAV replacement.  For better or worse we're going wheels boys.  YATS-YAS (you ain't tracks, you ain't shit) is now YAWS-YAS (you ain't WHEELS, you ain't shit)? That's gonna take some getting used to!

Distinct differences between the Marine Corps ACV and the Italian SuperAV

I was talking to Kinetics about the ACV and while hitting on the Marine Corps lack of interest in a 30mm cannon, which the Italian SuperAV has, I noticed some pretty interesting differences in the vehicles.

Above is the Italian SuperAV...below is the ACV.  Besides the 30mm cannon what caught my eye were the lack of "steamlineness" in comparison to the AAV.  You're gonna have alot of disturbed water heading to the props with this vehicle.  Next notice the swim vane on the ACV in comparison to the SuperAV. I'm not sure but it appears to be a bit "beefier" and while many believe that is armor (and it might serve that purpose too) attached to the front of the vehicle I get the impression that it's designed to work with the swim vane.  The next part is sketchier because I don't have a real good reference but the ACV appears to sport larger tires and if I'm not mistaken seems to be a larger vehicle than its Italian stablemate.

Am I off base?

Tues Funny. Yearbook pics from 1911

Below are yearbook photos from 1911. via Culture and Style Tumblr.

BAE Systems rolled out the first of 16 Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) 1.1 prototypes to the U.S. Marine Corps

via BAE PRESS RELEASE

BAE Systems rolled out the first of 16 Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) 1.1 prototypes to the U.S. Marine Corps in a ceremony today at the company’s York, Pennsylvania facility.
BAE Systems’ ACV 1.1 offering is a fully amphibious, ship-launchable and ship-recoverable 8x8 wheeled combat vehicle.
“BAE Systems has a long-standing legacy of supporting the Marines Corps’ amphibious mission,” said John Swift, the company’s director for the ACV 1.1 program. “That expertise, coupled with the hard work of our dedicated ACV team, has allowed us to deliver the first of these vehicles ahead of schedule.”
BAE Systems’ solution for ACV 1.1 leverages an existing platform provided by Iveco Defence Vehicles. It is highly effective at sea when compared to any other amphibious vehicle in production today, providing superior land mobility and state-of-the-art systems survivability.
“As the Marine Corps begins testing we are confident that the capabilities of these vehicles will be proven,” Swift said.
The BAE Systems solution balances the Marine Corps’ demands for an affordable, production-ready platform with added designs for increased force protection, water and land mobility, lethality, transportability, and survivability.

BAE Systems’ ACV 1.1 is equipped with a robust 700HP engine, providing a significant power increase over the Assault Amphibious Vehicle currently operated by the Marine Corps. The vehicle excels in all-terrain mobility and has a suspended interior seat structure for 13 embarked Marines, blast protected positions for an additional crew of three, and improved survivability and force protection over currently fielded systems.
The Marine Corps awarded BAE Systems a $103.7 million contract for the Engineering, Manufacturing, and Development (EMD) phase of the ACV 1.1 program in November 2015, one of two EMD contracts issued. During this phase, the company is producing 16 prototypes that will be tested by the Marine Corps starting in the first quarter of 2017.

BAE Systems has long been a trusted supplier to the Marine Corps across multiple domains and has more than 70 years of experience designing and building amphibious vehicles. The company is also a leading provider of combat vehicles, having produced more than 100,000 systems for customers worldwide. Iveco Defence Vehicles brings additional proven experience, having designed and built more than 30,000 multi-purpose, protected, and armored military vehicles in service today.

Geez.

Can't lie.  CoffeeJoeJava made some fantastic points and I still would love for the leadership to explain why this is the right solution for the here and now (I think that's the major disconnect..Amos was stomped on so hard that HQMC got into a bubble and free roaming discussion/explanation of decisions has all but disappeared today...we'll head in the direction chosen but at least explain why this is the right idea).

The BAE/Iveco is still my favorite, I think its right but I need to understand the compromises, choices made etc.  If they don't then the move from tracks to wheels will be a source of debate for a long time.  God forbid we ever see a pic of one stuck on a beach.