Update. Kill the Mobile Landing Platform.

The above pic illustrates what we already have in service and why the Navy shouldn't allocate any more funds to the fictional sea base.

We already have what we need. 

We should better use the tools that we already have in our toolbox.

The Mobile Landing Platform (MLP) is a luxury that we don't need and can't afford.  'Nuff said.

A project we should kill. Mobile Landing Platform.

Name one project that we can afford to delay or kill.

Yeah that's right I'm saying that we can afford to delay or kill the MLP.

The MLP is the result of happy thinking and fat budgets.  Those days have definitely passed.  Can you honestly tell me that the sea base, as the Marine Corp envisioned it, is an absolute necessity to the US way of war? 

It isn't and since it isn't essential it should be done away with. Quite honestly the money would be better used to purchase more LCACs or even other really needed ships.  As for getting vehiclesashore in areas with limited port facilities...check out the pic below.

2nd Commando Regiment Counter-Terrorism Exercise

India Battery EFSS live-fire in Kuwait

Know your enemy. ZBD05 Amphibious Vehicle.

Pics are from Air Power Australia.  Note.  We can talk all we want but they have the best info on Chinese weapon systems with the added bonus of not having ugly ass watermarks all over the photos.  Go to their website for more info on this and other threat weapons.

 Army Recognition has this vehicle as having a top waterspeed of 45km.  I seriously doubt it and I've never seen any pics of it planing.

I also wonder how many troops it can carry with the turret placed directly over the troop compartment.  But on a sidenote.  I once laughed at the thought of the Chinese attempting to duplicate USMC capabilities. 

They're still not there.

But on a local level.

If they concentrate on say a particular island or island chain...They have the ability to "look" like US Marines in the assault.  Whats probably more disturbing is that the Chinese are using this vehicle as a building block to something more advanced, which will mean increasing combat capability in the future.

Know your enemy. Chinese amphibious landing op.

Lockheed Martin. WHAT IS YOUR MAJOR MALFUNCTION?

Geez LM.  Are you guys crazy?  Do you have a pain fetish?  Do you like getting kicked in the nuts over and over?  In short what is your major malfunction?

WTF am I talking about?  Check out this interview with the den of evil...but as usual a tidbit.

It was hardly surprising when Lockheed Martin announced this spring that Chris Kubasik would succeed Robert J. Stevens as CEO at the start of 2013. The world's largest defense contractor had telegraphed the move two years ago, when Stevens relinquished the title of president to Kubasik, who was once a partner at accounting giant Ernst & Young and joined the company in 1999.
But he will take the top job under less than ideal circumstances: next January also happens to be when $500 billion in automatic cuts in U.S. defense spending could begin taking place under a legislative process known as “sequestration.” Lockheed Martin has warned that if Congress does not avert the cuts, it will be forced to lay off 10,000 employees, or 8% of its workforce. The company already has reduced its staff, including senior management, during the past two years as it seeks to get ahead of leaner Pentagon budgets. Kubasik met with AW&ST Editor-in-Chief Anthony L. Velocci, Jr. and Managing Editor Joseph C. Anselmo at Lockheed Martin's headquarters in Bethesda, Md., to discuss his plans to maintain the company's strong profit margins, what he is telling its 29,000 suppliers, and his close oversight of the over-budget F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.

Thats the beginning of the interview.

Does that sound like something thats even approaching fluffy interview territory?  Does that not sound like the beginning of the French Inquisition?

Why the brain trust at LM continues to put themselves through the Aviation Week meatgrinder is beyond me but the coverage of that program by AW has tainted the entire defense industry.

Companies are more guarded than ever about their projects.

The military is alot less forthcoming about issues with their projects.

A wall of silence is falling into place and it all started with the coverage of the F-35, extended to the FCS and even nudged the EFV.  Careers were made by destroying programs but the ramifications that came with that reporting (including the slaps on the back and the rounds of drinks) has led us to a dark place.

Thanks guys....and LM...get your balls back...and I'm not talking about the kind you play sports with.

Another word on why we need fewer carriers.

Hate to keep beating this dead horse but can you all tell me something?

When a crisis breaks out now why do we have to send three or four carriers to the scene and disrupt our rotation schedule?

Its because our carriers are understaffed when it comes to the number of planes that they carry.  A NIMITZ class carrier can hold more than 100 airplanes!  We send them out with 50 or 60.

If those same aircraft carriers were fully staffed then one carrier would be doing the job of two.  You would have less to send to various trouble spots but when trouble broke out, more than likely one would be enough!  You want to talk about surge rates?  Get the Carrier Wing back up to full strength and watch what happens.  You want shock and awe from the sea?  Let the enemy know that over 100 strike fighters on one carrier is sitting off his coast with double the number of escorts equipped with cruise missiles because we're able to get a fully equipped battle group together.

Fewer carriers does not mean less firepower.  If executed properly it can increase throw weight.

Feeding the Beast

A U.S. Marine Corps M1A1 Abrams tank finishes refueling at Combat Outpost Shir Ghazi, Helmand province, Afghanistan, July 27. The M1A1 Abrams is the main battle tank in use by the U.S. Marine Corps.
(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Samuel J. Nieves)

V-22 supports Harry S. Truman flight deck certification

An MV-22 Osprey assigned to the Argonauts of Marine Tiltrotor Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron (VMX) 22 lands on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) on July 19. This is Truman's first Osprey recovery. Truman is underway conducting carrier qualifications. (U.S. Navy photo)

SAAB ASW 601

I searched the website and it appears that this weapon is no longer being offered.  I'm sure it has to do with its lack of precision.  Too bad.  This might have actually worked on the LCS for anti-sub work.  If Clancy has sub hunting down then the LCS' dash speed with a drift and firing these off when in the general location of the sub might win the day.  Yesterday's technology that will probably re-appear once the Navy gets serious about sub hunting again.

Australian Maritime Counter Terrorism and Emergency Response Exercise

Interesting.  Who knew that Australia had sea going Snake Eaters...

Akula attack sub operated in the Gulf of Mexico.

 Many thanks to my bud Dwi for sending me this article.  Note: I never heard of the Washington Free Beacon but Bill Gertz is well connected.  I'm posting a tidbit but read the entire article.

A Russian nuclear-powered attack submarine armed with long-range cruise missiles operated undetected in the Gulf of Mexico for several weeks and its travel in strategic U.S. waters was only confirmed after it left the region, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

It is only the second time since 2009 that a Russian attack submarine has patrolled so close to U.S. shores.

The stealth underwater incursion in the Gulf took place at the same time Russian strategic bombers made incursions into restricted U.S. airspace near Alaska and California in June and July, and highlights a growing military assertiveness by Moscow.

The submarine patrol also exposed what U.S. officials said were deficiencies in U.S. anti-submarine warfare capabilities—forces that are facing cuts under the Obama administration’s plan to reduce defense spending by $487 billion over the next 10 years.

The Navy is in charge of detecting submarines, especially those that sail near U.S. nuclear missile submarines, and uses undersea sensors and satellites to locate and track them.

The fact that the Akula was not detected in the Gulf is cause for concern, U.S. officials said.

Hmmm.  I should be surprised but I'm really not.  To be quite honest I have a totally different take on this situation.  I've been doing a bit more reading on the naval issues of World War 2.  I was shocked to learn that besides the US sub force, the US Coast Guard had the most sophisticated sub hunting tools in existence at the time.  To be quite honest the Coast Guard could be called the subject matter experts on surface prosecution of undersea threats.

That history has been lost to both the Navy and Coast Guard.  Whoever came up with the idea of putting the Coast Guard into the Department of Homeland Security had to be smoking crack.  I would have preferred to see them fall under the FBI for domestic work and continue under the Pentagon for wartime issues.

Nevertheless, this is bad news.  We are watching two important parts of our naval warfighting capabilities get shit canned in order to give the LCS a reason for being.  Minehunting and ASW work.  We have to do better.

A global force for good?

I always thought that the Navy catch phrase...a global force for good...was too much meals on wheels, too much peace corps and not enough war fighter.

Well it seems like they're starting to have that debate.  Check out the latest from USNI Blog.

I wonder however, if new recruits are the only audience? Shouldn’t our brand also appeal to the American taxpayers and their direct representatives on Capitol Hill? To the teachers, counselors, parents and coaches—those figures America’s youth look to when trying to figure out their personal way ahead? The point is that the “brand” has to appeal to a broad audience, with different levels of experience and different perspectives. The challenge is to reach and appeal to this wide audience with a clear and concise message of who we are.

Yeah he's right.  They should try to relate to not ony a wider audience but also to retired/vet Sailors.  The current marketing campaign doesn't do that. 

What has me laughing my ass off is that he thinks that young men joining the Navy are all for the cup cakes and unicorns.  That migh apply to a few since don't ask don't tell was repealed but the societal facts point to something else.  The fastest growing sport in America is mixed martial arts.  The biggest fitness craze is cross fit which is just a rip off of mixed martial arts training techniques.  The next fastest growing sport is weight lifting.  That points to a much more macho type mindset...a more conservative mindset than the powers that be are comfortable with.

Read the whole thing and compare/contrast the comments between those with fingers in the air trying to say the politically correct thing and those that are speaking the truth.

Its really quite funny.

The Marine Corps' JLTV problem.

The Corps has a JLTV problem.  Check this out from Govt Exec.

Instead of fielding new vehicles with new technology, service leaders installed more armor on the vehicles they already have and buy off-the-shelf stopgaps to create MRAPs, mine-resistant ambush-protected trucks. But even the lightest, most mobile MRAP variant, the M-ATV (MRAP all-terrain vehicle), weighs in at more than 12 tons, more than twice an uparmored Humvee. Other, heavier MRAPs can hardly operate off-road: problematic but tolerable in highly urbanized Iraq, painfully limiting in rugged Afghanistan, and potentially crippling for future rapid-intervention missions around the world.

Now the Army and Marine Corps want a truck that’s much more maneuverable cross-country than an MRAP, yet much less vulnerable than the old Humvee. But their proposed solution, the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program, faced cancellation threats in Congress and already has been rebooted to control its rising costs. The Army likewise revamped its Ground Combat Vehicle after initial proposals came in at 50 to 70 tons, startlingly heavy even for what is essentially a tank.

Its past time for a bit of common sense when it comes to Marine Corps procurement of ground vehicles.

1.  The JLTV just doesn't make sense for the Marine Corps.  Have the balls to cancel Marine Corps purchases and pick an upgrade for the HUMVEE.  If we land in extended combat in IED infested areas then we pull MRAPs out of storage.  The JLTV as currently constructed will cause our ships to weight out before they cube out.
2.  The slow walk that is the Marine Personnel Carrier Program is a mystery.  You pick the best one (and on this I would aim for best land performance, not swimming ability...we'll never launch these from ship and everyone knows it).  We've been looking at this since 2010.  They've been tested at Marine Bases around the country.  Man up and make a selection.
3.  What gives with the AAV upgrade?  Again.  Pick out what's desired and just get it done.
4.  ACV.  Again, this is nothing but a big bag of WTF!  Simply take the transformer pieces off the EFV, don't make it plane on water and get some decent jet drives on it and lets get it in the fleet.

These are simple issues that the Marine Corps has the answers to.  The Marine Corps does have a weight problem and its with too many functionaries and procurement officials.  This should have been done a year ago.

No urgency.

No plan.

Too much talk.

You don't win wars that way and you don't win procurement battles either.  

NOTE:
Yeah I know this is just a thinly disguised hit piece on the F-35 by the guy whose name must not be spoken but he did have some juicy tidbits mixed in.  I've got to get my hands on the wargame where the Army tried to get amphibious....how would they manage that with Strykers, Bradleys and Abrams?

Has anyone ever heard of these guys??? US Corrections Special Operations Group.

Corrections Officers are  now considered operators?  We definitely need to get a better definition of the word.

Pikes Peak Crash.

Jalopnik has a great write up on this years race.  If you have only a passing interest in autocross you must check it out.

LCS vs...

Rules of the fight are simple.  You're commanding an LCS and you're going up against another threat.  Your only weapons are those that are integral to the ship itself.  No helicopters but mission modules are allowed.  Winner is determined by who ever is left standing at the end....

First up.  LCS vs.Pirate Dhow...

Operating off the coast of Africa, your LCS has been charged with stopping illegal piracy.  You spot a dhow that you suspect of being a pirate ship and as you approach to launch your boarding party, you're hit with small arms fire and RPGs.  You retaliate with your 57mm cannon and make short work of the threat.  LCS 1.  Pirates 0.  LCS wins.

LCS vs. Fast Attack Missile Boat.

Future war in S. China sea.  Your LCS is acting as a picket ship.  No helicopters are onboard as they've been called back to reinforce the anti-sub net for the Carrier Battle Group.  Suddenly from behind an island, a Houbei class fast attack boat comes storming out.  They're 25 miles away and you launch your Griffin missile and start punching out decoys and smoke 'cause you know a long range missile is coming.  Your Griffin missile comes up short (you knew it would, you just hoped it would get a reaction from the enemy) and you speed away at 50 knots.  The engine will have to be rebuilt but that means you'll have survived the encouter.  A rebuilt engine will be a small price to pay for the joy of living another day.  God frowns and you die.  Your ship is a smoking wreck.  The Chinese paint a silhoutte of an LCS on the bridge, your crew is shark food and the LCS is destroyed by a boat less than half its size.  LCS 0.  Fast Attack Boat 1.  Rematch.  LCS is given a mission module with Harpoon missiles.  The circumstances of the battle remain the same.  The outcome?  Mutual destruction.  Both ships launch at range and both ships are hit.  The Chinese missile has a heavy warhead so the results are the same on the US side.  The Chinese ship being small is also damaged beyond repair.  The sharks dine on both crews.  LCS loses.  Rematch?  LCS loses.  Houbei loses.

LCS vs. Frigate.

LCS vs a La Fayette class frigate.  Hmmm.  This should be a decent match up.  With anti-ship modules both ships are similarly equipped and since the La Fayette class carries Exocet missiles the throw weight of their weaponry is also similar.  Circumstances of the ship to ship combat are irrelevant.  Equal opponents.  Equal weaponry.  Comes down to a pick'em.  Results.  Tie.

Long story short?  You can't fight an LCS against anything bigger than a Frigate.  And thats where the Navy should go with these ships.  Equip the ships as frigates and add them to the fleet.  Modules should be limited to Special Ops only.  An anti-surface package and anti-sub package should be a given.  Limited anti-air should come from close in defense and its 57mm guns.  Re-engining them with a more economical engine should be a given and the idea of speeds approaching 40 knots should be abandonded.  It still won't be perfect but it will be servicable.

Water obstacle course in Djibouti

Photos by 2nd Lt. Joshua Larson

Note:
Captions are embedded in the photos.

SAAB RBS15 Mk3 anti-ship missile