The Warlords are back!

CH-53K already beating out CH-47D for orders.

via Flight Global.

The upgrade path had been considered in preference to buying new aircraft from Boeing. But despite the decision not to proceed, a senior air force source says the service's current fleets of Apaches and Bell AH-1 Cobras are able "to do the missions" required.
Meanwhile, the air force will continue to operate its current Sikorsky CH-53 transport helicopters until it can acquire the next-generation CH-53K. All other alternatives "were evaluated and dismissed", an air force source says.
Israel is already conducting a 2025 upgrade programme to its CH-53s, and the source says: "If needed we will prolong the life of this excellent platform until its successor is ready."
The US Marine Corps has a requirement for 200 CH-53Ks, with the service expecting the programme to undergo its critical design review "this summer".
Sikorsky should fly its first prototype in fiscal year 2013, with deliveries to the USMC anticipated to start in FY2015-16 and initial operating capability to be declared in 2018.

Awesome.  Even if the budget axe comes out for the MV-22, a capable lifter is already in development...and with Germany, France, Israel, Taiwan, Singapore and the Marines ready to buy the airplane, its a bet to escape the hangman's noose.

The Queen bitch slaps the Navy by mistake.

I'm sure the Queen didn't realize it when she was speaking to the UN, but by saying that the UN is the "real force for good" she sorta (in my opinion) bitch slapped the US Navy.  After all that's their new motto.  This from SkyNews.

"You have helped to reduce conflict, you have offered humanitarian assistance to millions of people affected by natural disasters and other emergencies, and you have been deeply committed to tackling the effects of poverty in many parts of the world."
But the Queen warned "much remains to be done".
She explained: "Former Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold once said that 'constant attention by a good nurse may be just as important as a major operation by a surgeon'.
"Good nurses get better with practice; sadly the supply of patients never ceases."
She went on: "In my lifetime, the United Nations has moved from being a high-minded aspiration to being a real force for common good.

Wow, I knew the new Navy motto struck me as being odd, off and not worthy of a military organization...I knew that the new 'partnership' doctrine seems out of place....now I know why.

The Naval Services...US Marine Corps included...are beginning to act as if they were an armed NGOs.

Warfighting has to become central to our mission again.  Any and everything else MUST remain secondary...even partnership and war prevention efforts.

UPDATE!!!!!
My feelings on the Navy's Motto are well known.  What I didn't know is where the phrase..."a force for good" came from. 

Think Defence has his theory.  This is his statement from the comments...

A 'force for good' unfortunately started to creep into UK doctrine and strategy publications about a decade ago.

It originated with Robin Cook, the then Foreign Secretary, when discussing ethical foreign policy.

Robin Cook resigned over Iraq, one of the very few politicians with any sense of honour or conviction I disagreed with a lot of what he said but he was a formidable and very well respected politician, a rare breed these days.

Wow, I can see it now.  10 years ago a Lt. Commander was on exchange duty in the UK and heard Robin Cook a few times and got inspired.  He comes back stateside and is put in the puzzle palace and the call goes out to revamp the Navy's image with a new slogan...

Amazing.  Pure conjecture on my part but it feels right.

Australian Navy-US Marine Corps interoperability highlighted at RIMPAC.

07 July 2010
HMAS Kanimbla embarks amphibious assets
A contingent of US Marines and other allied forces came aboard HMAS Kanimbla the day before she sailed for the sea phase of the exercise.
The Australian Defence Force’s largest international maritime exercise, Exercise Rim-of-the-Pacific (RIMPAC) is designed to test interoperability with 14 Pacific Rim nations.
Approximately 1200 ADF personnel will be participating.
This year marks the 22nd RIMPAC. It is being hosted by the US Third Fleet over a five week period, finishing on the 1st August 2010.

Australia's second batch of F/A-18's arrive...

Two F/A-18F Super Hornets fly over RAAF Amberley.

An F/A-18F Super Hornet, A44-210, taxis for the first time on the runway at RAAF Base Amberley.

The old and the new. An F/A-18F Super Hornet, A44-210, taxi's past some F111's at RAAF base Amberley.

An F/A-18F Super Hornet from the second 'tranche' soon after arriving at RAAF Base Amberley.

An F/A-18F Super Hornet from the second 'tranche' soon after touching down at RAAF Base Amberley.

The first F/A-18F Super Hornet from the second 'tranche' taxis at RAAF Base Amberley.

An F/A-18F Super Hornet from the second 'tranche' taxis at RAAF Base Amberley.

Pic of the Day. July 6, 2010.

Marines with 4th Platoon, Company C, 3rd Assault Amphibian Battalion, 1st Marine Division, return to amphibious transport dock USS New Orleans (LPD 18) after spending July 4, 2010, repairing the transmission of an amphibious assault vehicle on a beach in Ancon, Peru. The Marines were embarked aboard USS New Orleans in support of Partnership of the Americas/Southern Exchange, a combined amphibious exercise with maritime forces from Argentina, Mexico, Peru, Brazil, Uruguay and Colombia.

 

Is it time to drop the M1A1 from the Marine Corps?

I've been extremely busy lately.  With that in mind, while I was looking over the latest offering from DefenseTech, a weird thought crossed my mind.  Greg Grant point out that the Marine Operating Concept which just hit the streets has these as main points.

“The process of leveraging emerging technologies should begin with a bottom-up reevaluation of all systems from individual equipment through large principal end-items with a specific focus on making each system smaller, lighter, and more efficient whenever possible.”
Toward that end the Marines will pursue the following objectives:

• With the one exception of the KC-130 aircraft, every item in the Marine inventory must be able to be embarked on an amphib and be employable from ship to shore without the use of a pier.
• Consideration should be given to requiring that all combat vehicles have scalable armor protection capable of being embarked separately from the vehicle.
• Infantry companies must be able to operate independently without combat vehicle support. To further reduce vehicle dependency, the Marines should buy the aerial cargo drone; reduce equipment density; reduce energy demands by emphasizing renewable and alternative energies; and reduce battlefield contractor dependence.
• All units must be self sustainable for 72 hours.
• Reexamine the basic building blocks of the Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) to determine whether its current organization accurately reflects the realities of where and how it will be employed.
• Lighten the logistical footprint required to support the aviation combat element (ACE) by buying newer, less maintenance intensive, aircraft. The ACE must also reduce the amounts of fuel and oil it consumes.
• Add Joint Terminal Air Controllers (JTACs) to the lowest echelon possible.

If this is our doctrinal direction then where does the Main Battle Tank fit?  Is now the time for the Marine Corps to divorce itself from perhaps the most "Army of Army" weapons?

Before you go high and to the right think about it.

The M1A1 goes against the concept in every regard...

1.  Heavy logistical tail...

2.  Difficult to transport...

3.  Unable to operate independently or as part of Company sized units of maneuver.

Others can probably easily expand on this short list.  With more accurate artillery.  With Marine Air being able to provide almost 24 hour-all weather support.  With UAVs being able to provide ISR and close air support, then do we really need the shock action of the M1's 120mm main gun?

Tankers will state that the best anti-tank weapon is another tank.  I agree but in these times of limited budgets, a changing doctrine and the focus on expeditionary operations from the sea--can we really justify the Tanks existence in Marine Corps formations?

I don't know but I think that it should be considered.

Note:

Marine Armor is approaching a "shatter-point" soon regardless.  The US Army is due to embark on its M1A3 upgrade program.  The Marine Corps is already facing the choice of Upgrading to maintain commonality, keeping the M1A1 and maintaining an independent supply chain (expensive) or abandoning the tank all together.  The choice of whether heavy armor stays in the Corps will be decided one way or the other real soon.

Is the Israeli Army losing its professionalism?

Dancing while on patrol?  They've lost their minds.  Oh and how about the propaganda victory for the terrorist?

Former Marine, Astronaut and now politician playing administrator.

I can't put my finger on it but I had a visceral reaction to the comments by this Former Marine and Astronaut.

I can't believe that they're so willing to throw away our leadership in space.  This is bad stuff....just my opinion but I really don't like this.

Watch it and be annoyed.

Tilt Wing was the way to go. XC-142A...another blast from the past.

And a vid showing it undergoing testing with NASA is here.