Circling back to two previous blog posts...the Chinese Type 55 and the Jaguar Recon Vehicle..

Reading a few of the comments (catching up today and still behind....) there were two discussions that I think I need to explain myself on.  The first was the Type 55 Chinese ship and the second was the Jaguar Recon Vehicle...

I fell for the O-Kee Doke on this one.  The Chinese label their Type 55 as a destroyer but Galvars and others pointed out that this was more of a Cruiser class ship.

After reviewing the specs I think they're right.

And that's scary as fuck.  Many rightfully consider the Burke class as being modern day battleships.  What if the Chinese came out with something even more powerful?  Well they have and they're not stopping at one, two or three...they're gonna build a series of them.  Pause.  Evaluate.  And then build more.

For some unknown reason everyone wants to point to Russia as being the big bad.  They're not.  You want to point to the nation that wants to see us dead?  Look East toward China.  Even worse?  They're building a force not to fight us asymmetrically but to take us on toe to toe and win.  From my chair they're well on their way to getting that done.  By my estimate they already have regional superiority (we're probably at equivalency because of all the forces we sortied to the Pacific to deal with Korea crisis...but barring that we have too many worldwide commitments) and soon will have it no matter how many forces we send that way.

Want to be depressed?  Even if the Navy goes to 355 ships, it then becomes a matter of the quality of those forces.  We would still face a stalemate situation above the sea...only our submarine force could swing the decision in our direction during an at sea fight.  THAT IS THE ONLY PLACE where we still retain an undeniable advantage.

There was a bit of confusion over my calling the new French Jagauar "probably the best new breed recon vehicle" of this generation.  I stand by that.  My reasoning is simple.  Look at where the Aussies and the Brits have gone with their recon vehicles.  They're using IFVs, the Aussie version will probably be the 8x8 Boxer (if all the pundits are correct) and the Brits went with the ASCOD 2.  I believe they're both capable IFVs and fill that roll well.  The problem is that they're being flexed into the RECON role and I view that as being suboptimal for both designs.

Recon/Cavalry vehicles are suppose to locate the enemy, send a quick SALUTE and then get out of dodge.  They can dismount scouts and pull vehicles back if they haven't been spotted so that they can give constant updates and more precise information.  That gun on the vehicle?  Its suppose to be used  in the Recon role to disengage, in the defense role to delay or in the offense to screen the assault element from attacks on its flanks (simplistic explanation but you get the idea).  Its not their so they can hook and jab with enemy forces in a sustained fight.

Under those conditions the Jaguar in my opinion is superior based on size alone.  If you believe differently then I'd like to hear it but if you're gonna trot out armor protection then I don't really think you understand their role on the battlefield.  They're not supposed to take direct fire!  If that's what you want then you give a tank platoon a Cav guidon, big radios, a bright colorful neckscarf and a shiny black stetson and have them do the deed!

Gripen E - The Future-Proof Fighter

Thanks to Olgerts for the link!

The Rand Study was right? Chinese missiles could wipe out our bases in Japan?

via AOL Breaking Defense.

A Chinese surprise attack tomorrow could annihilate US forces and bases in Japan, two Navy officers found. But deploying more missile defenses — Army THAAD and Navy Aegis — would protect most targets north of Okinawa, Commanders Thomas Shugart and Javier Gonzalez found in simulations. Such a stronger defense, in turn, would reduce the temptation for Beijing to strike first in a crisis.

This scenario isn’t implausible. Chinese history and doctrine since 1949 show a marked preference for surprise attack. They struck Korea in 1950, India in 1962, Vietnam in 1974 and ’79. The Chinese usually justify their attacks as a defensive response to actions that threaten their sovereignty or vital interests. But those vital interests are defined very broadly — e.g. Beijing’s claim to the entire South China Sea — and armed force is seen as a legitimate response to purely political, non-violent provocations.

Story here. 

Interesting.  I would love to get a real deal look at sims that the Pentagon is running with regard to the F-35 versus Chinese and Russian fighters.  I bet what they're telling the public and what the truth is is diametrically opposed.

Additionally that much derided Rand simulation keeps getting proved right time after time.

The F-35 fanclub slams it but the truth is probably a bit depressing.  Remember when that plane was born it was cutting edge.  After more than a decade though its all common place.

The last thing that everyone should be aware of is that this isn't only about the F-35.  Its about our entire defense establishment in the Pacific.  We're too far spread out, covering too many bases....would we be able to mass forces in time to make a difference?  The other stunning thing is that in certain locales (Okinawa) we have too many forces in too compact a geographic area.

I keep look at Alaska.

It was once a major point of emphasis for our forces in the Pacific.  We should revisit the idea.  Aircraft can move at speed.  The idea of forward deploying so many forces within missile range of mainland China is in my mind crazy.

Either way we need to rethink our drink.  They aren't telling us the truth but the Pentagon is running the simulations and the threat is real.  If China goes HAM we're gonna get a black eye.

Airborne and Air Assault ARE NOT viable forms of forcible entry!

This post is gonna bring the hate and a bunch of stupid but that's ok.  It's time to get actual and factual with my audience.

Fact.  The Pentagon has stated that their are 3 forms of forcible entry.  Airborne, Air Assault and Amphibious Assault.

My Contention.  I believe that only one form of forcible entry is viable against a near peer foe.  Amphibious Assault.  I also contend that history has proven that the other forms of forcible entry are dead on arrival and only suitable for use against 2nd and 3rd world powers and terrorist groups.

Below I state my case.

Air Assault. 

Quite honestly this is the one that I was a bit jaded about.  The USMC does the heliborne assault thing with gusto but as a form of forcible entry it fails the test.  One incident is seared into my mind.  The Army's AH-64 assault Karbala.  via Wikipedia.

The 31 AH-64 Apaches of the 11th Aviation Group took off from Tactical Assembly Area Vicksburg, which was inside Objective Rams. One Apache crashed immediately after takeoff when its pilot became disoriented. When the Apache crews turned north toward Karbala, signals intelligence picked up over 50 Iraqi cell phone calls alerting the Iraqi forward units of the Apaches. As the helicopters came within range, the Iraqis signaled their troops to open fire by turning off the city's power grid for several seconds. Ground troops then opened up with a barrage of PKM, NSV, 23mm, and 57mm fire.
Lieutenant Jason King, pilot of Apache "Palerider 16", was hit by AKM fire[8] in the neck and suffered a severe hemorrhage, but he never lost consciousness.[3] He was later evacuated to Germany for surgery, but returned to his unit a few weeks later.[8] The Apaches were reluctant to return fire; most enemy fire was coming from houses and the risk of collateral damage was high. The helicopters scattered in search of the Medina Division, but were hampered by poor intelligence.
Apache "Vampire 12", flown by Warrant Officers David S. Williams and Ronald D. Young Jr., was forced down into a marsh after gunfire severed the hydraulics. The air commander's radio was also hit, preventing communication with the other helicopters. Attempting to flee the crash scene, both men swam down a canal, but were captured by armed civilians. The Iraqi government would later show the helicopter on TV and claim that it had been shot down by a farmer with a Brno rifle; however due to the high volume of anti-aircraft fire and the armor of the Apache, it is unlikely that a bolt-action rifle was responsible.[9]
The Apaches turned back for Tactical Assembly Area Vicksburg after a half-hour of combat. Most were without functioning navigation equipment or sights. At least two narrowly avoided a mid-air collision.[3] Post-battle analysis indicated the American gunships were targeted in a deliberately planned ambush[10] with cannon fire, RPGs, and small-arms all combining from multiple camouflaged fire teams.

By rights this should be labeled an "attack helicopter raid" and could arguably be considered outside the realm when we talk about the efficacy of Air Assault.  I disagree.  These were/are the most lethal helicopters that the US Army posses and they were mauled by Primitives in sandals firing AK's, RPG's and PKM's.

Against a higher threat enemy an Air Assault MIGHT be doable but it would take so much preparation that I don't believe it could truly be successful.  Think about it like this.  The enemy forces in this encounter used cell phones to coordinate a successful ambush of heliborne raid force.  I believe that this will be the ultimate result if the 101st were committed to entering a hostile nation.  It wouldn't be a sophisticated anti-air complex that would spell doom for that famed division...it would be a bunch of guys wearing sandals that are hooked up with the latest cell phone from Apple or Samsung.

2.  Airborne Assault.

The storied 82nd Airborne is the Army's premier intervention force (the Rangers belong to SOCOM so they lost that title in my mind).  They are setup (or were...I have kept up) with a Ready Company prepared to execute in 12 hours, a Ready Brigade that can go wheels up in (again I'm doing this from memory) 36 hours and then the Division can be on the go in 72 hours.

That's pretty damn impressive and is why every's ones cock's are out at Bragg.  They're the Army's tip of the spear and they'll make damn sure you know it (take a trip to what they once called Fatal-ville on a Saturday night and go to a bar or strip club...MMA fans would be impressed by the skill of drunk, out of their mind paratroopers).

All joking and stroking of egos aside, the Army is taking steps to make the 82nd more lethal on the ground.  They're procuring a ground transport that is easily air droppable from a C-130, thinking about a role for the JLTV in the airborne force and they're actively looking to procure a light tank.

The problem is simple.

They're fine light infantry, but its their method of employment that is the problem.  C-130, C-17 or God Forbid C-5 delivering a Brigade or more of troops by parachute into a hostile area is tough beyond imagination.  In an age of CNN, and other cable networks the buildup to hostilities would alert any potential target that an assault MIGHT be on the way.  Those aircraft might travel at high subsonic speed but they must slow to a max speed of 150 knots for airborne ops if they're using the T-11 (interesting that the T-10B was good up to 175 knots).

The result?  The 82nd is saddled with the fact that its transports are vulnerable to anti-air guns, man portable anti-air missiles,  complex land based anti-air defenses and even ship based systems (depending on the adversary).

We haven't even gotten around to the difficulties the division will face when its on the ground if they have to go toe to toe against a Mech Infantry or Armored Unit.

To add a bit of misery to all this they're only sustainable for 3 days before they must be relieved.  I don't know how long they could last in a high intensity fight before relief arrived.  Maybe 24 hours if they're conservative with their ammo and they're facing an infantry heavy force?

Conclusion.

My readers will take me to task but the facts are clear.  Only Amphibious Assault as conducted by the US Navy and the United States Marine Corps is viable.  The other forms are great against low level opponents but will falter against an even moderately trained force.

Do understand this caveat though.

Amphibious Assault is not to be undertaken lightly.  It will be rough work, will require the full effort of the Navy-Marine Corps Team and should be part of a national strategy with definable goals and a tactical outcome to be achieved by the landing.

But if we must kick in the door, then the only real option that we have is to call the Marines.

Flakka? Is this shit real?

Something for you zombie fans. BC #tacticalshit #tacticalsht #tacticalshithead

A post shared by Tactical Shit (@tacticalsht) on Jun 28, 2017 at 10:06am PDT

Jesus H. Christ!  Is this shit real?  I heard about eating (literally) another person hopped up on something...was it this?  6 Deputies to hold down one 105 pound male?  People running full speed into the back glass of an SUV?

If this is real then I'm carrying 33 round mags for back up from now on!

Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm pic of the day....

Fleet Air Arm & Frigates keeping our Nation's new Aircraft Carrier safe - on, below & above the waves
For more: http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2017/june/28/170628-frigates-secure-the-seas-for-hms-queen-elizabeth-on-maiden-sea-voyage

Foxtrot Alpha finally admits the F-35 is a total mess...

via Foxtrot Alpha.

Sadly, it is doubtful the Pentagon can do much to reverse this cycle of F-35 misery because, as our own Michael Ballaban wrote, this program needed to be cancelled 20 years ago if that decision was to be made. Canceling it now would cost hundreds of billions of dollars start a new program from scratch.

So, yeah, the Pentagon admits the platform is crappy. But that’s been obvious for quite a long time.

Story here. 

I follow this guy with interest.  He's a down the line, journalist...he touts the popular line because that's how he gets his stories.

When a mainstream journalist goes off the reservation then you know the program is bad.

Foxtrot Alpha just went off the F-35 reservation.

I almost feel sorry for them.  The rabid F-35 fanboy club will go crazy defending this crappy little fighter and this guy will be called everything but a child of God.

Pass the popcorn.  The flame war on that page should be a sight to behold.

Brazil recieves 23 AAV(RAM) via CirculoTrubia

Brazil has received the first 2 AAV7 of the 23 acquired second hand to the Marines, as you can see, RAM version.

Interesting isn't it.

Marines (myself included) forget that despite its age, the AAV series is still the gold standard of amphibious assault vehicles.  No other vehicle  has the seakeeping/or swim capability necessary to equal its ability to get from ship to shore.

The fact that our allies are scooping them up for pennies on the dollar from Marine inventory is telling.

The AAV is an oldie, but its also a goodie.

New Russian BMPT variant displayed in Syria

via Janes.

A previously unseen version of the UralVagonZavod (UVZ) BMPT tank support combat vehicle was displayed for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad when he visited the main Russian airbase in his country on 27 June.

The original BMPT Terminator was developed for the Russian Army to protect its main battle tanks (MBTs) in urban warfare operations by suppressing threats like dismounted anti-tank missile teams. However, the Russian programme was cancelled and the only known customer is Kazakhstan.

The original BMPT is based on a much-modified hull from a T-72 MBT with a higher roof towards the rear, a new armour package, and a new turret.

Chris Foss is on his game.  I noticed this pic (thanks to one of my readers) but didn't get its significance.

A new BMPT variant?

The Russians are ahead of the game (whether you like it or not).  We talk about fighting in urban areas?  They have a vehicle to get that fight done.  We talk about combating enemy UAVs?  They can engage those vehicles in an adhoc fashion with these vehicles.

We must stop resting on our laurels and get back to doing the hard work of prepping for the big fight that's coming!

Open Comment Post. June 28, 2017

Skunk Works hypersonic design

The Skunk Works hypersonic design – an aircraft developed to execute Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance and strike missions at speeds up to Mach 6.

Chinese YJ-12 Anti-Ship Missile proves 200nm is not enough...Admiral Greenert was right, we're gonna have to rollback enemy defenses!

via Chinese Military Review.

Very interesting GIF OF YJ-12 Sea-Skimming Supersonic Anti-Ship Missile being launched by Chinese H-6G Badger. While specifications of YJ-12 are not available, details of Its export version called CM-302 supersonic anti-ship missile were made public at Airshow China 2016.

China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC) has disclosed that CM-302 supersonic anti-ship missile has a range of 280 kilometers with warhead of 250 kgs. Missile is capable of sea-skimming at supersonic speed for most of the flight, with capability to  maneuver at terminal stage to avoid hard kill close-in weapon system (CIWS). 

So if the mythical sea base is setup 200nm off shore then even that isn't enough.  I can't find the article but I DISTINCTLY remember Amos and Greenert doing a talk, and Amos saying that we would need the sea base to hover 65, 100, maybe 200nm off shore.  Greenert disagreed and stated that the Navy will rollback enemy defenses.

The YJ-12 for export proves that Greenert was right (he also said that the F/A-XX should not necessarily be stealthy or fast).

There are no shortcuts or "easy" amphibious assault.

For it to work it will require hardwork.  The sooner the Marine Corps wraps its brain around the fact, the sooner we can get to work on dealing with these future threats to the Landing Force and get our Marines onto and across the beach toward the inland objective.

THERE IS NO EASY WAY!  But it is doable!