This is why I enjoy Loren Thompson articles.

Concise.  Clearly written.  No by products.  Read the whole thing here.

At the very least, Mabus needs to have a convincing explanation of why killing EFV won't put the lives of thousands of Marines at risk. The Department of the Navy has embraced "forcible entry" as the defining mission of the Marine Corps, which means storming enemy beaches under heavy fire. It also acknowledges that forcible entry requires an "amphibious tractor" like EFV that can maneuver warfighters from ship to shore and then quickly transition to land operations upon hitting the beach. Having made those two concessions, it has put itself in a box in explaining how to fashion a credible force structure in the absence of EFV. Even if EFV didn't have three times the water speed and twice the armor of the existing amphibious vessel -- which it does -- the simple reality is that the existing vehicle was developed in the 1970s, and littoral regions have become more dangerous since then.

Think Defence on the small arms debate.

I never considered that the same conversations were going on in Europe.  This is a must read.  Check it out here.

Thompson on the F-35.

The latest production agreement represents an auspicious start to the Pentagon's big efficiency push, because the aircraft will be built for about 20 percent less than government estimators had expected under a fixed-price contract in which any cost overruns will have to be partly covered by the contractor. Government plans had called for commencing fixed-rate pricing later in the program, but the government elected to transfer risk to the contractor earlier in the production cycle, in return for which Lockheed Martin received incentives to surpass the performance to which it had committed. The company apparently felt confident it could meet or exceed government goals, based in part on the very positive test results being recorded for the Air Force variant of the plane in California.
The defense department expects to buy 2,443 F-35s in three different variants for the Air Force, the Navy and the Marine Corps. The sea-service versions will cost more than the Air Force variant because they are being bought in smaller numbers and incorporate special features such as the ability to take off and land vertically. Recent testing successes on the Air Force version are crucial to the program's success, since it represents over two-thirds of the planned domestic buy and is the main export variant. The Pentagon's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office stated earlier this year that all three variants of the plane were meeting key performance requirements and appeared to face no significant design challenges.

Read it all here.

M-60E4's are still in the inventory?

I got the above pic from the Navy website. Its of a Sailor providing security on an amphib some type of naval vessel. What got my attention though is his weapon.

If I'm seeing it right, it looks like an M-60E4.

The Navy Seals and US Marines both ditched that weapon years ago and now we see it again. Does anyone have an visibility on how or why its in the regular Navy's inventory and how many there are?

2 new vehicles from OTT

Again, thanks Jonathan.  Via Shepard.UK...and the OTT website can be found here.

Samil 20 Hunter Light Strike Vehicle_English

SPEC Puma English

Force Protection wins Snatch Replacement Contract.

Thanks Jonathan!
via the BBC.

The Ministry of Defence has announced that a vehicle partially designed by Formula 1 engineers is to replace the controversial Snatch Land Rover.

MH-60R pics.

via Lockheed Martin/Sikorsky.

Defence Helicopter.

Defence Helicopter has an excellent write up on USMC helicopter modernization efforts.  Read it here.

26th MEU does ship boarding training.

Marines and sailors with Reconnaissance Platoon, Battalion Landing Team 3/8, 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, maneuver along the deck of HNS Aris during a simulated Maritime Interdiction Operation at Souda Bay, Crete, Greece, Sept. 13, 2010. The 26th MEU deployed aboard the ships of Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group in late August responding to an order by the Secretary of Defense to support Pakistan flood relief efforts. (Official USMC photo by Lance Cpl. Tammy K. Hineline/ Released)

Marines and sailors with Reconnaissance Platoon, Battalion Landing Team 3/8, 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, provide security aboard HNS Aris during a simulated Maritime Interdiction Operation at Souda Bay, Crete, Greece, Sept. 13, 2010. The 26th MEU deployed aboard the ships of Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group in late August responding to an order by the Secretary of Defense to support Pakistan flood relief efforts. (Official USMC photo by Lance Cpl. Tammy K. Hineline/ Released)

Cpl. Andrew Simich, a radio operator with Reconnaissance Platoon, Battalion Landing Team 3/8, 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, mans the helm while other Marines search the area aboard HNS Aris during a simulated Maritime Interdiction Operation at Souda Bay, Crete, Greece, Sept. 13, 2010. The 26th MEU deployed aboard the ships of Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group in late August responding to an order by the Secretary of Defense to support Pakistan flood relief efforts. (Official USMC photo by Lance Cpl. Tammy K. Hineline/ Released)

Sgt. Ruben Rodriguez, a radio operator with Reconnaissance Platoon, Battalion Landing Team 3/8, 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, checks a boat for enemy personnel aboard HNS Aris during a simulated Maritime Interdiction Operation at Souda Bay, Crete, Greece, Sept. 13, 2010. The 26th MEU deployed aboard the ships of Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group in late August responding to an order by the Secretary of Defense to support Pakistan flood relief efforts. (Official USMC photo by Lance Cpl. Tammy K. Hineline/ Released)

Marines and sailors with Reconnaissance Platoon, Battalion Landing Team 3/8, 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, maneuver along the deck of HNS Aris during a simulated Maritime Interdiction Operation at Souda Bay, Crete, Greece, Sept. 13, 2010. The 26th MEU deployed aboard the ships of Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group in late August responding to an order by the Secretary of Defense to support Pakistan flood relief efforts. (Official USMC photo by Lance Cpl. Tammy K. Hineline/ Released)

CH-53K Brochure.

M-037 CH53K Prochure Final Web

Jim Strock on "Augmenting the SeaBase".

I think what the nation needs to know about amphibious ships and amphibious forces is number one; that out of all the ships in the fleet — all the ships in the fleet — the only ships that can truly extend the full range of seapower ashore are amphibious ships. Aircraft carriers and surface warfare ships have tremendous strike capabilities, and the upcoming Littoral Combat Ships will provide enhancements to our surface combat, anti-submarine warfare, and mine warfare capabilities. But amphibious ships are armed with operationally ready Marine Air-Ground Task Forces (MAGTFs). Those ships can project and sustain those forces ashore, and can recover them to the seabase when and where required. That’s a degree of operational flexibility that significantly the range of options available to the Combatant Commander. That’s very important in today’s security environment. 

A must read.  Get it all here at the SLD Info website.

Australian DMO...say it ain't so.

via ELP Defens(c)e Blog...

"They are Lockheed Martin’s bitch."

Too funny. 

Watching the critics is just too funny! 

Pass the popcorn.