Friday, January 07, 2011
The EFV cancellation and the Commandant's Statement.
via Information Dissemination (note, this along with an article from the Conservative Wahoo are REQUIRED reading!)...below is the statement from the Commandant as presented on the I.D.'s website...my comments are in bold type.
Gen Amos' Statement on Cancellation of EFV Program
Topic: CMC Press Release - EFV TerminationReally Sir? The Air Wing is gobbling up the damn budget...the AH-1Z, UH-1Y, F-35B, CH-53K, and the MV-22B...yet we can't get the grunts an adequate Infantry Fighting Vehicle? Sir, you've got to be shitting me!
Today the Secretary of Defense announced the termination of the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) program. I support his decision. After a thorough review of the program within the context of a broader Marine Corps Force Structure Review, I personally recommended to both the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Navy that the EFV be cancelled and that the Marine Corps pursue a more affordable amphibious tracked fighting vehicle.
So in other words Sir, what you expect your Warfighters to do is to ride in an updated 40 year old vehicle? Again Sir, you've got to be shitting me! Even if we follow the US Army's example and get new build AAV's dressed with uprated engines, blue force tracker, GPS, battlefield internet and perhaps ATK's compact 25mm cannon, we're still operating an uprated old vehicle. Damn Sir, you're making the idea of having only Grunt Commandant's make more and more sense!
Despite the critical amphibious and warfighting capability the EFV represents, the program is simply not affordable given likely Marine Corps procurement budgets. The procurement and operations/maintenance costs of this vehicle are onerous. After examining multiple options to preserve the EFV, I concluded that none of the options meets what we consider reasonable affordability criteria. As a result, I decided to pursue a more affordable vehicle.
With all due respect Sir, you're busting Sunshine off my ass! You're saying that we need to maintain an Amphibious Tractor in our Corps yet you didn't fight for this vehicle. A cheaper vehicle will be a less capable vehicle. High Speed? Kiss it good bye. A capable IFV defeating cannon? See ya! Hey Sir, be advised, you can't bullshit a bullshitter!
Our Nation’s amphibious capability remains the Corps’ priority. In the complex security environment we face, the execution of amphibious operations requires the use of the sea as maneuver space. A modern amphibious tracked vehicle is the means towards this end. It enables the seamless projection of ready-to-fight Marine rifle squads from sea to land. It is thus the key to allowing ship-to-shore operations in permissive, uncertain, and hostile environments; assuring access where infrastructure is destroyed or nonexistent; and creating joint access in defended areas. It is also central to the entire Marine tactical vehicle strategy for operations ashore. Once on land, an amphibious armored fighting vehicle provides the Marine rifle squad with the protected mobility and firepower to maneuver to a position of advantage to rapidly close with, engage, and defeat the enemy.
See the above.
The Marine Corps remains committed to develop and field an effective, survivable and affordable amphibious tracked vehicle. To bring this capability to the force sooner rather than later, we intend to capitalize on the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s recent efforts to streamline procurement and to rapidly accelerate the acquisition and contracting processes in developing our new amphibious tracked vehicle requirement.
Ya know what Sir! If you weren't ready to issue the RFI the day after this announcement then you're already late. The Air side is covered. Your ground forces are hurting. MRAPs are not IFVs. The AAV is not an IFV. The US Army has gone through the M-113, Bradley A1, A2 and A3 and now the Stryker! We've soldiered on with the AAV. You've got to get this together.
Shortly, we will issue a special notice to industry requesting information relative to supporting our required amphibious capabilities. We look forward to working with industry in meeting this challenge to field a modern and affordable amphibious tracked vehicle that will support our Nation’s needs.
WE NEED AN IFV! WE DON'T NEED THE IAR! SIR, GET IT TOGETHER SIR!
Thursday, January 06, 2011
Raw Video of 3/5 Kicking Taliban Ass...
Marines with 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines have been fighting the Taliban throughout Afghanistan's Sangin Valley for three months. They experience enemy contact almost daily and have gained tremendous ground. In a recent operation, Marines and Afghan soldiers fought through an enemy ambush and built a new patrol base. Marines continue to work with Afghan security forces and Afghan government authorities in the area. Video by Cpl. Daniel Blatter
Recovered, Repaired and Returned to Service.
The Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 84 aircrew
taxis down the flight line at Naval Air Station Jacksonville for a
functional check flight Jan. 4. In October 2008, another Seahawk struck
the aircraft, both with rotors turning, during night operations in Iraq
causing extensive damage to the helicopter. Both aircraft were airlifted
to Fleet Readiness Center Southeast: one to be repaired, the other to
be used for parts. FRCSE artisans were able to repair both and return
them to service. (U.S. Navy photo by Marsha Childs/Released)
via NavAir...
The Class “A” mishap occurred when the main rotor of a mobile Seahawk clipped the tail pylon of a second stationary helicopter during night operations that injured Iraqi and U.S. personnel and caused more than $1 million damage to each aircraft.An amazing job was done by the guys at the Fleet Readiness Center. Well Done!
The stationary aircraft sustained extensive tail pylon damage requiring a total replacement of the tail pylon and accessories, a repair that depot-level maintainers could handle.
The taxiing aircraft landed on its right side sustaining excessive damage. The right-hand landing gear and associated support structure either snapped off or collapsed into the lower fuselage. Also damaged were the aft weapons pylon and the horizontal stabilizer.
Based on an initial visual assessment, it seemed likely the aircraft was destined for the Stricken Aircraft Reclamation and Disposal Program (SARDIP) and stripped of valuable components with the remainder sold for scrap metal...(it didn't happen that way...follow the link for the whole story!)
Did the Navy help sink the EFV?
Jonathan sent me this article on the killing of the EFV from the New York Times...read the whole thing here, but this portion caught my attention...
Navy officials have suggested that Marines would only undertake assaults after enemy defenses had been largely subdued through weeks of bombing by ships and planes. But retired Marines say it is naïve to think that the military would always have such a luxury of time or that bombing works that well.My first impression when I read that was WTF?! And my second was...what office was putting this out? Which part of the Navy has declared war on the Marine Corps? The article did not name officials but I'm definitely trying to find out. More later.
Navy, Army and Marines conduct logistics exercise.
Awesome. I'm personally happy to see this. While this may seem like a non-event, its much more than that. This is another step in the Sea-Basing Concept. If they could only get the JHSV (and maybe an LHA/LHD) into the act next time then all the basic pieces will be in place. But even more importantly, the US Army is finally getting into the act. If that service buys in then the concept is assured of further funding.
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
A Common Sense Statement on the J-20.
via Flight Global.com ... read the whole thing here.
Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, warns about concluding much based on available images.
"Drawing even tentative conclusions about anything other than the basic airframe configuration strikes me as speculative," he says. "The canard-delta configuration, coupled with canted vertical fins, is reminiscent of MiG's now cancelled 1.42 programme, and it would be interesting to know why the Chinese designers settled on this approach, rather than that of the Lockheed F-22 or Sukhoi T-50 platform."
Joe Cool...
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
EFV dead? Its your fault Marine Corps!
If this story from DoDBuzz is true...then the EFV is heading toward the chopping blocks.
Headquarters Marine Corps, the EFV program office and the Commandant have only one place to look when they're trying to find the
How can a service who's reason for being is Amphibious Assault have allowed this most important of weapon systems to be delayed over and over again....allowed it to go over budget over and over again...and expect it to survive?
I don't have a clue. But several factors led to this...
1. A lack of urgency.
During the day's of the Bush administration, the taps were turned on for defense spending. Of all the services, only the US Army seemed ready to exploit the opportunity this provided. The Marine Corps was caught flat footed and instead of pushing through with evolutionary capabilities chose instead to push for risky, costly revolutionary ones instead. This caused delay, delay costs time, time costs money and money is part of the reason this system got killed.
2. Marine Air screwed Marine Ground.
Our air side has lived high on the hog and got too large a share of the budget. How can I say this you ask? Because the USMC is due to receive the AH-1Z, UH-1Y, CH-53K, MV-22 and the F-35B. What new gear has the ground side received? The MTVR, LVRS, M-777, and refurbished M1 Abrams done over as Assault Breacher Vehicles. Oh and we're also due to get our hands on the IAR...a rifle that the Grunts don't want, that the Gunners love and the Infantry Community is still debating.
3. Think Tank Follies.
Every new administration has a favorite think tank. I have my own (yes Dr. Thompson, you're my hero and the Lexington Institute rocks) but even hero's sometimes get it wrong. Thompson has advocated (during the Bush administrations tenure) for an emphasis on transforming the Marine Corps into more of a Commando type force. The new administration doesn't have a plan but have harped on silly notions of Theater Entry as opposed to Amphibious Assault. A later post will cover my issues with both concepts but suffice it to say that the latter concept (in vogue now) is aimed only at the Marine Corps and has at its roots an effort to weaken the need for assault from the sea (amphibious lift) and the tools to carry it out (the EFV).
While the efforts by think tanks are mainly fodder for Congressional Aides, they do invoke discussion, debate and ultimately influence budget decisions.
4. FAILURE TO TELL THE MARINE CORPS STORY!
This is our biggest failure.
This is an indication that our culture is weakening.
This shows that we have not remembered our history...we've forgotten former (budget) battles.
Every article discussing the Marine Corps in magazines and newspapers starts off with..."after 10 years of warfare the Marine Corps has become a second Army!"
NONSENSE! And the saddest part of this is that those very words originated with our former Commandant!
Last year was a busy, almost chaotic year for Marine Forces worldwide. Action and activity in Haiti, Iraq, Afghanistan... Training local forces in Europe, Africa, Asia... Providing forces afloat in the Pacific and the Atlantic... And finally maintaining skills in Bridgeport, 29 Palms and Ft. A.P. Hill.
Second land Army my ass. But the story isn't being told and Headquarters Marine Corps is sipping coffee instead of ringing telephones.
Finally.
If the EFV is indeed on the chopping block then we've got to get a replacement for the AAV up and running with the speed of a loving husband getting his pregnant wife to the hospital while she's in the middle of labor.
General Dynamics has had its bite at the apple. They didn't get it done. Too bad so sad. Pack your bags. We might give you another chance in about 10 years...but right now, its time to ring BAE's phone...have them do to the AAV platform that they did with the CV-90 Armadillo and simply get a major upgrade on evolutionary systems.
A more hydrodynamic form. Upgraded engines. A remote weapon station (with the ATK cannon). Improved water jets....
Its all doable, and we should be able to have a fully amphibious...swift (is 15 knots possible with upgraded water jets?...not as fast as the EFV but possible), mobile (able to maintain pace with M1's cross country), hi tech and mine resistant vehicle on the drawing boards by the end of the year....ready for demonstration by the middle of next year and ready for production by the year after that.
URGENCY,
EVOLUTION NOT REVOLUTION
AND PROPER COMMUNICATION WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT THE MARINE CORPS IS DOING AND WHAT THE MARINE CORPS NEEDS TO DO ITS MISSION.
That's how you win budget fights...how did we forget that?
Required Reading...The History Of Marine Corps Aviation 1912-1985 emphasis on the acquisition of the Harrier AV-8A and the 'warfare' necessary to make it happen...
J-20 Concept Art.
SinoDefense and SinoDefense Forum have been posting CGI of the new J-20. These are the best of what I've seen...from where I'm sitting it appears that the Key Publishing Forum and SinoDefense Forum are the best sites for breaking info on this airplane. Check them both out.
Monday, January 03, 2011
LHA-6. No well deck? No problem!
The title is definitely tongue in cheek. Perhaps the Brits came up with a suitable work around...the stern gate.
But here's a primer on the LHA-6 gate issues (note the reference to the failed operations of the LPH during the 1970's) ...
via National Defense Magazine (its an old article but definitely worth the read)...
An aviation-centric amphibious ship is not a new concept. In the late 1950s, the Navy built a class of amphibious assault ships called Landing Platform Helicopters, or LPH. These vessels carried Marines and rotory-wing aircraft. The only way to leave the ship was by air.and this...oh and note...that's the same Robert Work that's now Under Secretary of the Navy...
“That turned out to be largely a failed experiment,” says Work. In operations off the coast of Lebanon in the late 1970s, the ships’ helicopters encountered a significant air threat that resulted in the Marines being transferred to another amphibious ship to go ashore by sea.
“What we learned about the LPH is that we needed a well deck,” says Marine Col. Robert Coates, director of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force’s training and exercise group.
The aviation-centric design of the LHA replacement — or LHA(R) — also has raised questions about its long term usefulness. Considering that Marines require heavy trucks and armored vehicles once they reach the shore, most of that equipment can only be transported by hovercraft, not by helicopters.
“It’s been a long-running debate, and it’s still not settled,” says Robert Work, a naval analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, D.C. “There are a lot of questions on LHA(R). Will it become the standard, or will it become only a niche capability?”
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)