The French in Afghanistan.

Bryaxis sent me this vid (Thanks guy!  I guess I would label this counter point to my "bashing" of the EU..well done Bryaxis!)  One question though. 

The UK fought alone more effectively than NATO is against a more capable foe!

Grand Logistics came by and added this to the discussion on Libya...

Hello Solomon,

you hit the nail on the head there.

To understand what is going on you would need to read the Lisbon Treaty,Common Foreign and Security Policy and the Anglo French defence agreement.

That is a lot of dull reading but it can be summed up as follows:

Eliminate individual European nations' ability to conduct independent military operations by cutting force sizes and eliminating capabilities to enforce military integration.

Hence eliminating British aircraft carriers, there is a European agreement on creating a Pan European carrier group,and maritime patrol aircraft and probably the heavy tank fleet in future.

The idea being that all European countries will work together to project European power overseas.

Sarkozy and arch Europeanist Cameron appear to have seen Libya as a demonstration of European military power.

Hence U.S.S.Enterprise staying in the Arabian Sea and U.S.Air Force operations now drawing down as Obama lets them get on with it.

Good call Mr.President.

Cameron and Sarkozy have been rudely reminded of their military impotence.

The Common Foreign and Security Policy has been shown to be a sham.

Europe is looking a bit silly.

The United States has reinforced it's global dominance.


GrandLogistics.

What has me going from amused at the situation to being shocked is this simple fact.

The UK went up against a more powerful foe, at a greater distance from home, with a more challenging set of mission objectives than NATO is facing right now.

The UK beat the Argentinians.

This current conflict is in doubt.

Whether its because of politics.  Because of the UN mandate (essentially politics).  Or a lack of military capability (I would guess this is the main reason).  One thing is readily apparent.

If the current conflict is stressing resources then those resources need to be increased.

NATO is useless. The UK has shed its military power. The EU is nothing.

Let be clear on a couple of facts.

1.  This war in Libya shouldn't be a major lift for NATO.

2.  The UK faced more serious opposition alone in the fight against Argentina.

3.  The UK shed present day capability for the POSSIBILITY of future savings.

4.  The Germans practice an almost isolationist foreign policy and an aggressive trade policy.

5.  The smaller EU nations are punching above their weight but can't be expected to shoulder burdens in two war zones.

6.  French military power has been greatly over estimated.

7.  NATO is useless if not dead.

This from Reuters...

By Erik Kirschbaum and David Brunnstrom
BERLIN, April 15 (Reuters) - NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Britain voiced optimism on Friday that NATO allies would supply more combat planes for the Libyan mission, but Italy ruled out ordering its planes to open fire.
Britain and France are urging other NATO allies to provide more planes capable of hitting Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's ground forces after Washington cut back its role in the operation and passed command onto NATO on March 31. I GUESS TEAM AMERICA WORLD POLICE ISN'T SO USELESS AFTER ALL...ESPECIALLY WHEN ITS A WAR THAT EUROPE WAS BEGGING TO GET INTO.  MEANWHILE IN THE US, EVERYONE EXCEPT NEO-CONS AND NO THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE US MILITARY, WANTED TO SIT THIS ONE OUT.  THIS IS AN ALLIANCE OF LIBERALS AND NEO-CONS THAT I THOUGHT I WOULD NEVER SEE.  A POX ON BOTH THEIR HOUSES.

"We have got indications that nations will deliver what is needed ... I'm hopeful that we will get the necessary assets in the very near future," Rasmussen told a news conference at a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Berlin.
The leaders of France, Britain and the United States published a jointly-written newspaper article on Friday vowing to keep up their military campaign until Gaddafi leaves power. Some countries, such as Russia, say that goes beyond the terms of a U.N. Security Council resolution authorising the campaign.
Libyan rebels have pleaded for more air strikes, saying they face a massacre from government artillery barrages in the besieged city of Misrata.
The United States and European NATO allies have so far rebuffed French and British calls to contribute more actively.
British Foreign Secretary William Hague, who has been lobbying other NATO allies to provide more strike aircraft, also said after talks with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that he was hopeful more strike assets would be made available. Asked if Britain might be prepared to contribute more combat aircraft if other allies did not step forward, Hague said: "We'll always keep that under review but ... as of today this question doesn't arise."WTF!!!!! THEY'RE PUSHING THE US TO CONTRIBUTE MORE AIRCRAFT BUT ITS UNDER REVIEW?  THE QUESTION DIDN'T ARISE???

How do you best describe the operation in Libya?

One word.

Clusterfuck.

How did he arrive at this?

Galrahn over at Information Dissemination has some 'interesting' thoughts on the second engine fire/explosion to occur to US Navy/Marine F/A-18C's within a month.  Read his whole article at his place but these are the statements that caught my attention.

My second thought is how the Joint Strike Fighter would have been FUBAR once the engine goes out. It is hard to believe the US Navy is still going down the one engine path.

My final thought is what a good job the pilot did getting the Hornet back on deck. There really is lots of good stuff here. Well done to the Navy for releasing the video, even in what is ultimately bad news (an engine blows up on a flight deck) there is a lot of great stuff in this simple video.

Wow.

An old airplane has suffered two engine mishaps in less than a month and we get into a debate on which is better...single or twin engines?

Galrahn knows better and has access to NAVAIR studies on the issue.  As Derek stated on his blog...

Two engines are not any better than one. It is a myth that all twin jets can survive on one engine. Not all systems are redundantly powered by both engines. Also if the failure is catastrophic it could kill the other engine too.

If you understand probability if you have two engines with the same rate of failure then you are doubling the chance of an engine failure over a single engined aircraft.

The F-8, A-4, and A-7 had similar safety records as all the other twin engine aircraft of their generation......

As far as the part about the pilot doing a good job...I agree.

As far as there being alot of good stuff on the video...totally disagree.  He lauds the crash crew for getting quickly to the crash but to be honest (unless he's never been up close to flight ops)...crash crews are on alert for all landings at military sites.  Additionally even if they weren't they'd be alerted after a pilot aborted his landing (especially during night ops)...but lastly...the main focus should be on a second engine going tits up.  I'm really surprised we aren't seeing a safety stand down so that these engines can be inspected.  Could ops tempo be interfering with fleet safety?

Comment of the Week. April 16, 2011.

I get tons of great comments during the weeks and I've decided to start doing a comment of the week post.  This week SMSgtMac wins the prize.  Here he's commenting on my post "JSF making progress"...

I'm not worried about the B at all. Among other things, I've been reviewing the history (not just the popular myths) about the LWF competition and subsequent acquisition of the F-16 and F-18, including what was called 'The Great Engine War'. Fascinatiing how history repeats itself with only minor differences. The Marines NEED the B model first and want it only because they need it. Their aviation track record for the last decade makes them look pretty smart, and like the other programs, everything with the B seems to be playing out as they have forseen. The B model is only the fourth Marine Air program in a row that I can think of that the 'nattering nabobs of negativity' have dumped on. So far the nabobs are proven to be 0 for 2 (V-22 and UH-1Y) about to go 0 for 3 (AH-1Z), and they can't point to anything concrete to hang a claim on they'll win the next one. The F-35 program overall can accrue development costs up to $1 under the equivalent of three separate development programs that would have occurred by developing these planes separately and the program is a bargain. The question was executability: could it be done? Guess what? the really 'hard' stuff IS done and now the SDD program is on the downhill slope. Are there challenges ahead? Sure- that's why you don't have every 'dotcom' shop or second/turd-world design house building latest-gen military aircraft. The second thing you'll never hear out of the weak sisters on the sidelines, is that even at 'Block 1' maturity, the F-35 is MORE effective and deadly than the LATEST F-16. BTW: The APA's biggest contribution is in the entertainment value derived from observing a spark chaser and a mechanical engineer trying to sound cogent on Computational Electromagnetics.

F-35B purchase reduced to 3...lies, damn lies and APA lies.

"Without going all Hearst" on ya, I've got to tell you how "Perplexed" I am at the decisions that our Congressional leaders have made when it comes to the F-35 program.

They have taken lies, damn lies and APA lies and used it to justify a slow down in the development of the B model.

The model that has the potential to be the glue of the international effort to get our allies to purchase this airplane.

I'm not talking about those that are already in the program...I'm talking about those that have or are making purchases that would make the F-35B the ideal airframe to operate from them.

Japan...it'll be looking to rebuild its industrial base...it had an entire F-2 squadron wiped out...Typhoon lovers are smoking crack if they really believe that it can win an order here.  Its twin engined but comparatively short legged and lacks capabilities.  Its barely ground attack capable.  Anti-shipping is definitely beyond its abilities.  Japan should be a no brainer for the F-35.

S. Korea...same as above without the industrial damage of the tsunami.

Singapore...with the proliferation of big deck LHD's in the Pacific, this island kingdom will not remain on the sidelines.  Its a natural.

Australia...talk about capability without ability!  Buy two LHD's without a fast jet to operate from them?  I don't see that lasting.  Besides, with the Air Force buying additional F/A-18's, it'll allow them to be more flexible in their purchasing decisions.

US...the big deck carriers are already on the accountants chopping blocks.  The need for 10 carriers is about to vanish.  This isn't exactly a bad thing.  What it will mean is that aircraft carriers will get back to 80+ aircraft on their decks again.  This might allow Marine Air to focus on the neck down strategy ....

Long story short...the whispering campaign by the APA, Sweetman and the rest of this cabal has obviously caught the ear of Congressional Staffers.

Conventional wisdom is wrong...but in this case its fashionable.  I can't wait until they're all crushed like grapes.

JSF making progress.

via the Lexington Institute.

As the Pentagon moves towards negotiating for the next lot of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, it is doing so with a sense that things are moving in the right direction. Pentagon acquisition chief, Under Secretary Ashton Carter, publicly stated that he was more confident in the program. There is also said to be an improved working relationship between senior Lockheed Martin officials and the new head of the Joint Program Office, Vice Admiral David Venlet.

The test program for the F-35 is firing on all cylinders. If the current progress is sustained, by mid-year the program will be caught up to its planned test program, eliminating at least one of the probationary items established last year for the STOVL JSF variant, the F-35B. The program will also address another problem area when it begins testing of a redesigned inlet door that has been causing some vibration problems.
In addition to progress on the airframe, avionics and software, the F-35s engine maker, Pratt & Whitney (P&W), is also making progress. Fixes have been implemented for each of the problem areas identified in earlier tests and should be completed before the end of the year. Equally important, P&W has committed to its original cost reduction plan for the next lot of engines, despite the fact that the restructured program is buying fewer F-35s than originally planned. According to reports, P&W has committed to dropping its price by 13 percent through engine 250, a cost savings rate more than double the typical six percent reduction for an engine program at the same stage of development.
The biggest challenge facing the JSF program is not technical; all the problems identified for the aircraft and the engine have fixes in development or actually deployed on test vehicles. The biggest issue is cost. The program is on track to produce the aircraft for the target price of $60 million a copy when it reaches full production. The problem is that the Pentagon and the Congress are continually reducing the annual buys for the aircraft. This makes it very difficult for Lockheed Martin and P&W to move down the learning curve, provide predictability to their subcontractors or manage their labor force correctly. Everyone who shops at Costco or BJ’s knows that when you buy in bulk you save money. Well, the same thing is true for weapons platforms.
While it is right for the Pentagon to make affordability a priority in weapons systems acquisition, it is equally the government’s duty to act like a responsible buyer. If DoD wants a low, stable price than it has to commit to a predictable acquisition rate and to reaching that target as rapidly as possible.
Daniel Goure, Ph.D.

More good news you won't here about...

The program is on track to accomplish all of its goals.  Despite the e-mail campaigns that many bloggers, writers and critics are engaged in, the policy makers and the services are fully behind this airplane.

The naysayers have had their day in the sun...Blogs got readership by being anti-JSF.  Those days are coming to an end.

I couldn't be happier.

You're over the target when you're taking fire.

The UK blog Think Defence has an interesting article on the Eurofighter Typhoon.  In it he covers the costs of bringing the airplane into production and isn't gentle in his critique of the "first air to ground" mission.  To be precise, he calls it a publicity stunt.

I couldn't agree more.

But what's stunning about this revelation is that Think Defence is generally a huge supporter of placing all the UK's aviation assets in the RAF basket.  If he's turning on you then you've got issues.

More relevant and I think an even more stunning article is found at Sharkey's World Blog.  Here's a sample.

The Typhoon had to fly in company with a Tornado because the £160 million worth of laser targeting pods destined for fitting to the Typhoon were still in their packing crates and the Typhoon pilots were not qualified or trained to use them.  The Tornado was therefore used to acquire the targets for the bombs and the Typhoon pilot dropped his bombs when directed to by the Tornado crew. This can be viewed either as an innovative and sensible way of ‘making good’ serious national front line deficiencies or as a very expensive and inefficient way of doing so. The latter view seems more appropriate when Harriers from carriers remain available with trained aircrew to do a job which presently requires a Typhoon /Tornado combination which, even if either aircraft performed to desired specification, would be at a markedly higher cost.

and then this...

8.         The basic costs of this mission can be broken down as follows:

Typhoon: three hours flying time                                                        £240,000

Tornado: three hours flying time                                                        £105,000

Refuelling tanker: five hours flying time                                             £150,000

Fuel costs: approximately                                                                     £100,000

Total cost of the single mission                                                      £595,000

8.         Harrier aircraft from a carrier could have completed this mission for less than £80,000 and without this cost of deploying Typhoon, Tornado and tanking aircraft and associated ground support to Italy and Cyprus.

9.         Those are the basic mission costs. The support costs are more difficult to estimate but suffice it to say that running RAF Marham for one year is more than four times the cost of running HMS Ark Royal or HMS Illustrious for the same period.

Long story short.

My friend in the UK is able to put facts and figures to thoughts that many of us have.  The retirement of the Harriers was short sighted and not well thought out.

Inter service politics has cost the UK capability and the inability to admit the mistake will see that this capability is not restored.

Read the whole thing.  Sharkey is taking flak...that means he's on target.

101st Airborne, 2/327th, "No Slack" Battalion; fighting on a hill top.

U.S. Army soldiers From the 2/327th No Slack Battalion, 101st Airborne Division, return fire after receiving small-arms fire during combat operation in the valley of Barawala Kalet, Kunar province, Afghanistan, March 29, 2011.

U.S. Army soldiers From the 2/327th No Slack Battalion, 101st Airborne Division, return fire in the valley of Barawala Kalet, Kunar province, Afghanistan March 29, 2011.

U.S. Army soldiers From the 2/327th No Slack Battalion, 101st Airborne Division, return fire from behind cover during combat operations in the valley of Barawala Kalet, Kunar province, Afghanistan March 29, 2011.

A U.S. Army soldier From the 2/327th No Slack Battalion, 101st Airborne Division, relieved after a fire fight with the Taliban opens his mouth up towards the sky to taste the snow as it falls in the valley of Barawala Kalet, Kunar province, Afghanistan March 29, 2011.

A U.S. Army soldier From the 2/327th No Slack Battalion, 101st Airborne Division, returns fire with a M-249 squad automatic weapon during combat operations in the valley of Barawala Kalet, Kunar province, Afghanistan March 29, 2011.

UPDATE:

I sent the guys at BlackFive an e-mail asking why the 101st would establish a base camp on the sideslope of a hill instead of on top of it.  They responded that it was probably mission dependent...they were observing trade routes and established it where they would have the best field of fire.

Makes sense to me.  Mission first...Troop welfare second...

Long story short.  They established the base in an area that would help them accomplish the mission.

US Army is about to shelve the M24 Sniper Rifle.

This is really the end of an era.  I just really have to wonder when an up sized M110 will eventually supplant the XM2010...semi automatic sniper rifles appear to be the wave of the future.

via Military.com.

The Army is moving closer to arming all of its sharpshooters with the XM2010 Enhanced Sniper Rifle, a powerful new sniper rifle that can reach more than 50 percent farther than the weapon currently in use.

 

The XM2010 first hit Army ranges late last year, and the service's top gear buyer says it is already targeting bad guys in Afghanistan.

 

The new rifle takes some of the parts of the current Remington-built M24 bolt-action sniper rifle -- which has been in the Army's inventory since the late 1980s -- and marries them with an updated stock, magazine and rail system.

 

But in a major shift brought on by experience in Afghanistan, the XM2010 is being built to fire the .300 Winchester Magnum round, which can hit targets up to 1,200 meters away. The current M24 -- much the same as the civilian Remington Model 700 -- fires a 7.62mm round that can reach targets about 800 meters away.

Read the whole thing but the US Army appears to be setting course toward a two rifle system...the XM2010 for long range shots and the M110 for the shorter/urban stuff.

What remains unsaid is whether the .50 caliber rifles are going away.

I'd almost bet money that they are.  The 300 Win Mag can almost reach as far and as far as I know shoot flatter.

Eurofighter Typhoon teaches hard lessons on modern aircraft procurement.

The Eurofighter might be everything its designers claim it to be.  That doesn't mean that even after years of development and deployment that its quite there yet.

This story from SkyNews sheds some unfortunate light on the plight of the UK's Eurofighter force.

Get ready for some drastic cuts. A must read article.

Joe sent me this article (thanks guy, it spoiled my day but its a must read in my opinion).

Read it here. 

Long story short.  Defense is primed to get a major haircut if liberal leaning thinkers have there way.  Its totally understandable IF all programs get the same treatment but entitlement programs shouldn't be saved at the expense of constitutionally required  government functions.

I also find it interesting that Defense is considered a standalone entity when our foreign policy (including the protection of other advanced democracies) drives our spending.  Unless we have a policy change then any cuts in Defense spending will be a fools errand.

Pic of the day. April 14, 2011.

110411-N-EC658-004.ATLANTIC OCEAN (April 11, 2011) An aircraft director guides an MV-22B Osprey assigned to Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron (VMM) 263 (Reinforced) to a landing aboard the multipurpose amphibious assault ship USS Bataan (LHD 5). Bataan is deploying to the Mediterranean Sea. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Julio Rivera/Released).

Trophy...active combat vehicle protection.

Impressive. Fire Scout flight record..

via ASDNews.

San Diego - The Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC)-built MQ-8B Fire Scout vertical takeoff and landing tactical unmanned aerial vehicle marked a new single-day flight record of 18 hours.

U.S. Navy operators achieved the record using a single aircraft in a series of endurance flights Feb. 25 from the USS Halyburton (FFG 40). Fire Scout is providing intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance data to support anti-piracy missions while deployed on the ship for the Navy's 5th Fleet.

I like it.  The only thing really missing with these advancements is the lack of standardization.  The K-MAX is about to enter service with the Marines as a cargo UAV and it would make sense to use either it or the Fire Scout for both missions.  Current budget realities demand it.  Still NGC is to be congratulated.

Did you hear about this incident at Camp Pendleton?

via 10News.com

SAN DIEGO -- One of the nation's largest military bases is reportedly under tighter security after three Middle Eastern men tried to enter without proper authorization.10News learned the three men -- 40-year-old Afghani Ahmad Rahmani Naeem, 41-year-old Iranian Vahik Petrossian and 27-year-old Iranian Sengekdi Norvik Avanosian -- attempted to get into Camp Pendleton last weekend under what was considered suspicious circumstances.On Wednesday, base officials said there was no threat, but others on the base told 10News security has been stepped up.According to a Be On the Lookout (BOLO) alert issued to high-ranking Camp Pendleton officials, someone reported hearing hateful comments and terrorist threats from three men at a gas station in Oceanside Saturday.Investigators at Camp Pendleton said the men asked the attendant for directions on how to get to Camp Pendleton before they left the gas station. According to the alert, shortly after midnight Sunday, a rented silver Toyota Corolla driven by Naeem attempted to enter Camp Pendleton through the main gate. As it was being searched, Petrossian and Avanosian drove up in a black Mercedes, but were told to wait. Instead, they continued past the gate and onto the base. Following a short pursuit, the Mercedes was stopped and searched.No weapons or contraband were found in the Mercedes, but base security noticed the air bag in the steering wheel of the Mercedes had been pulled out and re-attached with duct tape and had wires hanging free, the alert said.According to the alert, Naaem told base security he was lost and was trying to go to Glendale. When interviewed, Petrossian and Avanosian said they were lost and trying to go to Glendale. The three men claimed not to know each other, the alert said.Naaem, Petrossian and Avanosian were photographed and released after questioning, and a warning about the trio was posted to law enforcement.However, later that morning about 8:30 a.m., Naeem returned in the Toyota and tried to get on the base again, saying he made a mistake and was trying to enter Interstate 5, the alert said. After his vehicle was searched, Naeem was issued a letter of debarment from the base and escorted to the freeway.Since the incident, 10News learned high-ranking Camp Pendleton officials have notified other military bases and law enforcement of a potential threat.

This happened last month and I'm just hearing about it now.  Talk about a story being swept under the rug!  This is beyond interesting.  If you can add anything to this story, please let me know.  I'm beyond curious.

Winning! NAVAIR seeks multi-year V-22 buy.

via DoDBuzz...

The Navy hopes to hear back from Bell-Boeing on a proposal for a second multi-year contract for 122 V-22 Ospreys on May 26, such a  deal would round out the Air Force and Marine Corps buy of 50 and 360 aircraft, respectively.
If the five-year deal is approved, it means that the Pentagon will save a minimum of ten-percent over a one year buy of the tiltrotors, according to Col. Greg Masiello, NAVAIR’s V-22 program manager. The flyaway cost for each bird is roughly $65 million.
“At this point we’re confident of ten-percent savings over a single year price,” is all John Rader, Bell Boeing’s executive in charge of the V-22 program, would say when asked if the deal will save more than ten-percent.

Congress must approve the deal before it can go forward.
Meanwhile, the Air Force variant of the tiltrotor is seeing readiness rates pushing 80-percent for deployed units while Marine MV-22 squadrons operating in the field are up to around 70 percent, according to Masiello. Stateside units are still a little lower than that.
And in a very interesting piece of Osprey news, HMX-1, the Marine chopper squadron that flies Marine One presidential helicopters will receive 14 MV-22 Ospreys to haul the president’s gear starting in 2013, said Masiello. The tiltrotors will replace the VH-53D Sea Stallions used to carry the president’s gear (not the president) that are being pulled out of VIP duty and back into regular cargo hauling squadrons. Last year, Boeing announced that it was offering up the V-22 in response to a NAVAIR request for information on a new Marine One replacement chopper.

The only thing left is for the AAV replacement..the Amphibious Combat Vehicle, to get going.

Europe fights Europe. Are we hearing NATO's death rattle?

A death rattle is a medical term that describes the sound produced by someone who is near death when saliva accumulates in the throat.

British and French officials are calling out their NATO (read that to be European partners) allies for not pulling their weight when it comes to the conflict in Libya. 

via Defense News.com

"NATO is not able, at this point, to oblige our partners to take part in this action," Longuet told the French parliament.
"I regret, for example, that France and Britain are carrying the bulk of the effort," he said.

 and...

"That is why the United Kingdom has in the last week supplied additional aircraft capable of striking ground targets threatening the civilian population of Libya," Hague said.
"Of course it would be welcome if other countries also do the same," he said. "There is always more to do."

This is a stunning development.  For all the complaints of "USA World Police" it seems that NATO is failing in this conflict.  Two of the Three traditional NATO powers are complaining of the contributions of other member states.  Replace NATO with EU and you have a failed European enterprise.

NATO is the walking dead.  The only people that don't realize it are the politicians.

Winning! USMC to start receiving F-35B's this year.

Yep, you heard right.  F-35B's will be received by the USMC this year.

via DODBuzz.

First off, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program manager Vice Adm. David Venlet let everyone know that it looks like the Marines will indeed receive B-model JSFs before the years end, noting that there are about 30 of the short takeoff and vertical landing planes in production under the LRIP 2 and 3 batches. While this doesn’t mean the Marine’s IOC date will swing back to 2012, it is a glimmer of hope for the B model which has been placed on a two year probation. So, far this year, the Bravo has demolished its flight test goals and just last week it performed its first ever automated short takeoff, according to Venlet.
Meanwhile, Lt. Gen. Terry Robling, the Marine Corps top aviation official made a rather sour prediction, saying the Pentagon should get ready for a ten year or “dual FYDP” budget crunch. This makes delivering aircraft on time and on budget all the more important lest they go away, said the three-star. This type environment adds to the importance of keeping legacy jets such as the F/A-18 Hornet in service until they are slowly replace by F-35s and the possibility that a sixth generation naval fighter may be a modified or upgraded variant of the F-35, added Robling.

Great Choice for SGTMAJ of the Marine Corps.

WASHINGTON-Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. James F. Amos announced Sgt. Maj. Micheal Barrett as his selection for the next sergeant major of the Marine Corps. Barrett recently returned from Afghanistan where he served as the sergeant major of Regional Command Southwest and I Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward). He currently serves as the sergeant major of 1st Marine Division at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Calif. Barrett will replace Sgt. Maj. Carlton W. Kent, who has served as the sergeant major of the Marine Corps since April 25, 2007. The relief and appointment ceremony and retirement of Kent is scheduled for June 9 at Marine Barracks Washington., Sgt. Ben J. Flores, 4/5/2011 3:00 AM

Commandant announces next Sergeant Major of Marines 

4/12/2011  By Sgt. Michael S. Cifuentes  , Headquarters Marine Corps 

 

WASHINGTON  — Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. James F. Amos announced the next sergeant major of the Marine Corps April 11. Sgt. Maj. Micheal Barrett, 1st Marine Division’s sergeant major, is set to take charge as the senior enlisted Marine in the Marine Corps. He’s scheduled to succeed Sgt. Maj. Carlton Kent, the current sergeant major of the Marine Corps, during an appointment and relief ceremony, and Kent’s retirement ceremony held at Marine Barracks Washington June 9.
Barrett recently returned from a deployment to Helmand province, Afghanistan, where he served as Regional Command Southwest’s sergeant major.
Amos said Barrett is “the best of the best,” and will continue to serve the Corps as Amos’ senior enlisted advisor.
“Sgt. Maj. Barrett, through his long and distinguished service to our nation, has demonstrated that he is particularly well-suited to serve as my senior enlisted advisor through the challenges ahead,” said Amos.
Barrett enlisted as an infantryman in March 1981. In addition to Afghanistan, his combat deployments include serving in the Persian Gulf War as a sniper with 3rd Battalion, 9th Marine Regiment, and two tours in Iraq as battalion sergeant major of 2nd Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment.
Kent has served as the sergeant major of the Marine Corps since April 25, 2007. He graduated recruit training March 1976 at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, S.C. In his 35 years of service, Kent has led Marines in various billets to include senior drill instructor and battalion drill master at Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego, chief drill instructor and first sergeant at Naval Aviation Officers Candidate School in Pensacola, Fla., and sergeant major of I Marine Expeditionary Force at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Calif.