The Muqata: Israeli SWAT team wins International CounterTerror Competition
Monday, October 25, 2010
Stories that caught my eye.
The Muqata: Israeli SWAT team wins International CounterTerror Competition
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Top Ten Issues facing the Marine Corps..
My top ten...
1. The upcoming reduction in force. How many Marines will we have in our Corps in the next 4 years? Final end strength is going to be a big deal that few are talking about now. Everyone will be talking about it soon.
2. EFV. Does it live or die? If its axed is someone ready with a replacement or will we have to start all over? One thing I've noticed is that no bid contracts are awarded for updates. This means that if BAE is johnny on the spot, a major revamping of the AAV can win rapid approval and we'll still maintain our amphibious capability with a better vehicle.
3. CH-53K. Will we ever get that program really moving? Its beyond needed and in certain scenarios will be more capable than the MV-22.
4. MV-22. We've walked, now its time to run. Either this airplane is ready to go or we should stop production and move on to the CH-53K.
5. Marine Personnel Carrier. Kill this idea now. We're playing with Corps money...time to cut our losses...and our dreaming.
6. IAR pipedream. Come on. Do we really need a modern day BAR?
7. Aviation sucking sound. Our procurement policies have become lop sided. Aviation is costing too much and absorbing too large a slice of the Marine Corps budget. Sometimes I think new build CH-46's along with the new built AH-1Zs/UH-1Ys would have been a better way to go.
8. Naval Shipping. The Navy is playing hardball with the Corps. We need our boatspaces back.
9. Tanks. They aren't in the fight and we need to decide what role they're going to play in a modern Marine Corps. Either they're part of the fight (everywhere---heck we used them in Vietnam) or we get rid of them.
10. General Officer Corps. Its going to happen and the Marine Corps should lead the way. As long as we're reducing the size of the Marines, we should slice more than a few General spots. Let the Navy place Admirals in those positions but this Purple non-sense of General/Admirals everywhere has got to come to an end.
Lockheed Martin ... maintaining our nations military history.
I found this on the Lockheed Martin website. Its fortunate and a bit ironic that a multinational corporation is maintaining our nations aviation history in an easy to find and access website. The Smithsonian, DoD and other governmental organizations should follow suit.
Boeing stressed stealth with clever internal arrangements and weapon bay designs that carried munitions semi-submerged.
After a year of study and report writing by industry, ASD performed
mission analyses on four generic fighter designs that spanned the
variety of aircraft investigated by the companies. The aircraft were
labeled N, SDM, SLO, and HI. N (numbers) was a small, cheap concept that
could be bought in quantity. SDM (supersonic dash and maneuver)
emphasized speed and maneuverability. SLO (subsonic low observables) was
based on a flying wing design. HI (high-Mach/high-altitude)
represented a large missileer. The results, which were presented to all
participants, favored the flying wing. The more conventional SDM
fighter placed second in effectiveness. The missileer (shown here) and
inexpensive minifighter did not rate well in the analyses.
After a year of study and report writing by industry, ASD performed
mission analyses on four generic fighter designs that spanned the
variety of aircraft investigated by the companies. The aircraft were
labeled N, SDM, SLO, and HI. N (numbers) was a small, cheap concept that
could be bought in quantity. SDM (supersonic dash and maneuver)
emphasized speed and maneuverability. SLO (subsonic low observables) was
based on a flying wing design. HI (high-Mach/high-altitude)
represented a large missileer. The results, which were presented to all
participants, favored the flying wing. The more conventional SDM
fighter placed second in effectiveness. The missileer and inexpensive
minifighter (shown here) did not rate well in the analyses.
After a year of study and report writing by industry, ASD performed
mission analyses on four generic fighter designs that spanned the
variety of aircraft investigated by the companies. The aircraft were
labeled N, SDM, SLO, and HI. N (numbers) was a small, cheap concept that
could be bought in quantity. SDM (supersonic dash and maneuver)
emphasized speed and maneuverability. SLO (subsonic low observables) was
based on a flying wing design. HI (high-Mach/high-altitude)
represented a large missileer. The results, which were presented to all
participants, favored the flying wing (shown here). The more
conventional SDM fighter placed second in effectiveness. The missileer
and inexpensive minifighter did not rate well in the analyses.
The ability to operate an aircraft from battle-damaged runways was yet
another characteristic evaluated in the early ATF studies of the 1970s
and 1980s. Designs incorporating this capability are referred to by a
number of terms, including short takeoff and landing, short takeoff and
vertical landing, and vertical takeoff and landing (STOL, STOVL, and
VTOL, respectively). The benefits of abbreviated takeoffs and landings
are, however, less clear than benefits associated with stealth, speed,
and maneuverability.
NOTE--From the writer of SNAFU!*
This study was conducted for the USAF. It can be rightfully stated that the USAF considers an expeditionary environment to mean operating away from home base. A USAF expeditionary environment is in some places a better standard of living than Marines and Soldiers would have at their home bases/posts. It should also be noted that the USAF is reconsidering the usefulness of STOVL aircraft in light of soon to be shifting priorities to the Pacific and the threat of Chinese conventional ballistic missiles being able to destroy conventional airfields.
The ability to operate an aircraft from battle-damaged runways was yet
another characteristic evaluated in the early ATF studies of the 1970s
and 1980s. Designs incorporating this capability are referred to by a
number of terms, including short takeoff and landing, short takeoff and
vertical landing, and vertical takeoff and landing (STOL, STOVL, and
VTOL, respectively). The benefits of abbreviated takeoffs and landings
are, however, less clear than benefits associated with stealth, speed,
and maneuverability.
NOTE--From the writer of SNAFU!*
This study was conducted for the USAF. It can be rightfully stated that the USAF considers an expeditionary environment to mean operating away from home base. A USAF expeditionary environment is in some places a better standard of living than Marines and Soldiers would have at their home bases/posts. It should also be noted that the USAF is reconsidering the usefulness of STOVL aircraft in light of soon to be shifting priorities to the Pacific and the threat of Chinese conventional ballistic missiles being able to destroy conventional airfields.
Boeing stressed stealth with clever internal arrangements and weapon bay designs that carried munitions semi-submerged.
NOTE--From the writer of SNAFU!*
This study was conducted for the USAF. It can be rightfully stated that the USAF considers an expeditionary environment to mean operating away from home base. A USAF expeditionary environment is in some places a better standard of living than Marines and Soldiers would have at their home bases/posts. It should also be noted that the USAF is reconsidering the usefulness of STOVL aircraft in light of soon to be shifting priorities to the Pacific and the threat of Chinese conventional ballistic missiles being able to destroy conventional airfields.
NOTE--From the writer of SNAFU!*
This study was conducted for the USAF. It can be rightfully stated that the USAF considers an expeditionary environment to mean operating away from home base. A USAF expeditionary environment is in some places a better standard of living than Marines and Soldiers would have at their home bases/posts. It should also be noted that the USAF is reconsidering the usefulness of STOVL aircraft in light of soon to be shifting priorities to the Pacific and the threat of Chinese conventional ballistic missiles being able to destroy conventional airfields.
SNAFU! on politics.
This is probably the most effective political commercial of this year. For any conservative, this is a kick in the balls...for a liberal its a lie...for American's its a future that we all fear. Well done.
Could the Force Protection Ocelot be the JLTV killer??
The British Army more closely resembles the US Marine Corps than it does the US Army.
Not in size, but in operating concepts.
With that in mind, I wonder if the Ocelot that they are beginning to procure might not be the answer to the Marine Corps JLTV problem?
Its modular.
Its blast protected.
Its relatively light wt.
The only thing left to wonder about is its price. If the price is competitive in any way then the option to upgrade HUMVEEs or procure the current crop of JLTVs will become non issues.
The Force Protection Ocelot...the answer to the Marine Corps JLTV requirement.
Update* Wouldn't it be ironic if the UK developed the requirement and vehicle that ultimately meets US needs and due to budget constraints isn't able to buy it? In light of the UK's duplicity in the F-35 manufacturing program (becoming a partner...scooping up manufacturing concessions along with tech transfers and then bailing) that would be justice indeed!
Not in size, but in operating concepts.
With that in mind, I wonder if the Ocelot that they are beginning to procure might not be the answer to the Marine Corps JLTV problem?
Its modular.
Its blast protected.
Its relatively light wt.
The only thing left to wonder about is its price. If the price is competitive in any way then the option to upgrade HUMVEEs or procure the current crop of JLTVs will become non issues.
The Force Protection Ocelot...the answer to the Marine Corps JLTV requirement.
Update* Wouldn't it be ironic if the UK developed the requirement and vehicle that ultimately meets US needs and due to budget constraints isn't able to buy it? In light of the UK's duplicity in the F-35 manufacturing program (becoming a partner...scooping up manufacturing concessions along with tech transfers and then bailing) that would be justice indeed!
Ready on the firing line...
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Friday, October 22, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)