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...
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)