NAVAIR V-22 testing.

F-35 CF-3 arrives at PaxRiver.

NAVAIR just posted this vid.

The UK prepares for a evacuation of personnel from Yemen.

You reap what you sow.

Destroy your Naval Expeditionary Forces and you're left with an inadequate fleet to get the job done.  Interesting.  The Royal Air Force can't even provide close air support in a proper way to assist the evacuation.

From the Daily Telegraph.

Three Navy Merlin helicopters have been also been "stripped out" of their anti-submarine equipment to be ready to help. The Telegraph understands that the aircraft will only be used to evacuate the British ambassador and his staff, as well as the 30 man military training team helping Yemeni special forces.
A force of 80 Royal Marines from Alpha Company, 40 Commando, equipped with landing craft and helicopters and enough arms to secure a port are also on board the ships, which are using Djibouti as a basing area.
The Apaches would be expected to escort the Merlins to the capital Sana'a, one of a number of cities where there have already been clashes between government forces, troops loyal to a general who has defected and tribal militias.
They might require desert refuelling, and it is believed part of the reconnaissance mission was to find a suitable rendezvous spot. The helicopters would also be expected to suppress anti-aircraft weapons with their Hellfire missiles.
The Apaches have already shown their ability to carry out strike missions from sea after they were launched from the helicopter carrier HMS Ocean on to targets in Libya earlier this month.

If I was British.  If I was watching this nonsense.  If I was witnessing the death of my once great Navy.

I would be like Sharkey Ward.  I'd be in agony.

Gates opposed to closing overseas bases.

Gates is opposed to closing overseas bases. 

He cites the high upfront costs...but ignores the long term savings.

He cites the message it would send...but ignores the message he attempted to send last week.


This via DODBuzz.

Secretary Gates, counting the hours until he’s sprung from his five-sided dungeon, warned senators on Wednesday about the risks involved with closing U.S. bases overseas as part of potential cuts to the defense budget. For one thing, he said, it would probably cost money upfront, as opposed to saving it, to build headquarters and barracks and other facilities in the U.S. to house the troops who now live in Europe. For another, it might send a dangerous message:
“What kind of signal to do you want to send the rest of the world, as far as America’s role in the world?” Gates asked.  “At the same time as we’re cutting the defense budget, we cut State’s budget, and State has fewer assets to deploy aboard, we have fewer assets to deploy aboard — are we basically sending the message to the rest of the world, to China, Iran, North Korea, a variety of others … that the U.S. is closing up shop and going home and headed toward Fortress America again?”

Not only would that have a chilling effect around the globe, Gates said, he argued that the American military bases in Europe have actually helped stem the trend of diminished NATO usefulness that he famously warned about last week.

“Our presence in Europe, one of the benefits it has brought — in addition to the fiscal benefit of having troops rotate from Germany to Afghanistan — one thing is has brought, is it has slowed, I think, this deterioration of NATO military capabilities,” Gates said.
Is that because European troops need to maintain a certain level of proficiency to keep pace with the Americans? asked Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Maryland. Absolutely, Gates said.
“We train with them, we work with them, so they have to have capabilities to match us when we’re doing that,” he said.
Whatever you think of Gates’ arguments on foreign basing, his warnings appeared to add another bullet point to his list of things that DoD must keep — along with the now-familiar litany that includes the F-35, the KC-46A, Army and Marine Corps recapitalization, SSBN(X). At this rate, it’s getting difficult to see what things Gates would be all right with losing. Fortunately for him, with only 15 more days on the job, he won’t be around to have to figure that out.
What do you think — is Gates right?

No Gates isn't right.

He just proved that we're subsidizing European defense.

He just proved that they're not interested in their own defense.

He just proved that a big segment of Europe isn't worth the time or money.

Gates is wrong.  Time to pull ALL our forces out of Europe.

F-35 News.

Lockheed Martin F-35 Program Flight Test Update

FORT WORTH, Texas, June 14th, 2011 -- Overall, the F-35 program remains ahead of the overall goals for test flights and test points year-to-date. Through May 31, the program accomplished 378 flights versus a plan of 297 and accomplished 3,342 test points against a plan of 2,217.
Several flight test and production key milestones were accomplished since the last report:

• The F-35B short takeoff /vertical landing (STOVL) jet BF-1 performed the 100th vertical landing for the test program on May 12. For 2011, 106 vertical landings have been performed.
• The F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) jet AF-1 flew to Mach 1.53, the fastest-to-date speed of the existing aircraft fleet. AF-7 completed the longest test mission to date lasting 4.1 hours.
• During the month of May, all three variants of the F-35 flew a combined total of 94 System Development and Demonstration (SDD) flights, the most achieved in a single month in program history.
• The F-35 program flew the most flights ever recorded on one day (May 25) when a combined total of 10 flights (includes SDD and LRIP) were completed at all three of its flight test locations at Edwards Air Force Base (EAFB), Calif.; Fort Worth, Texas; and Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md. (PAX).
• The U.S. Air Force accepted into its fleet, the second of a planned 1,763 production-model F-35 Lightning II stealth fighters when AF-6 was delivered to EAFB on May 13. AF-6 was the second aircraft in Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) lot one contractually delivered.
• One of the first two F-35A production aircraft that will be delivered to Eglin AFB, Fla., accomplished its first flight on May 13. Known as AF-9, the aircraft will be delivered to Eglin for pilot and maintainer training later this year. This jet is the second aircraft to fly from LRIP lot two.
• Two F-35C carrier variant (CV) aircraft, known as CF-2 and CF-3, were delivered to the F-35 test fleet at PAX. CF-2 was delivered May 16 and CF-3 delivered June 2.
• CF-2 successfully completed the first F-35 public fly by at the Andrews AFB, Md., Joint Services Open House Air Show during the opening ceremony for the event May 21.

The following statistics reflect the cumulative flight test activity totals for 2011:

• F-35A CTOL jets have flown 183 times.
• F-35B STOVL aircraft have completed 166 flights.
• F-35C CV jets have flown 62 times.
• From the start of flight testing in December 2006 through June 13, 2011, F-35s flew 971 times, including the production-model acceptance flights and AA-1.

The F-35 Lightning II is a 5th Generation fighter, combining advanced stealth with fighter speed and agility, fully fused sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced sustainment. Lockheed Martin is developing the F-35 with its principal industrial partners, Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems.
Headquartered in Bethesda, Md., Lockheed Martin is a global security company that employs about 126,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. The Corporation’s 2010 sales from continuing operations were $45.8 billion.

Damn!

Who am I seeing in their offices weeping like babies, banging their heads against their desks and saying mommy make the successful American fighter go away?

Why its Sweetman and Wall. 

You can both pound sand boys....the USMC order of this fighter (along with the Navy) will make it more successful than the Eurofighter.  Add the USAF to the mix and the Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen and F/A-18 Super Hornet become irrelevant in the market place.

Another bad day for a couple of Europeans turned US defense writers, turned undercover European/Russian/Chinese fighter fans.

Pheonix Think Tank responds to questions about Falklands defense.

This letter by Sharkey Ward says it all and reinforces my belief that without a strong Navy, the UK is in peril.

“Sir,
It is a sad thing for Britain when Ministry of Defence spokesmen blatantly mislead the nation as in the last paragraph of Thomas Harding’s excellent article on our lack of ability to prevent Argentina retaking the Falklands (12 June 2011).
We are told by MoD that “Our ability to reinforce [The Falklands]  rapidly by air has been maintained.” This is utter nonsense. As in 1982, the Royal Air Force would not send its transport aircraft and refuelling tankers anywhere near the Falklands if British forces did not have control of the skies over the islands. Further, any invasion of the Falklands by Argentina would be conducted without warning and Mount Pleasant airfield would be the first bit of real estate that Argentina Forces would secure. Air supremacy and airspace denial would be the prerogative of Argentina, not Britain.
The only real deterrent to Argentina is for Britain to maintain a carrier battle group capability. Without such a capability Britain would be unable to contest an Argentinian invasion.
When will the MoD (RAF) start telling the public and our politicians the truth about such matters?
Yours sincerely,
‘Sharkey’ Ward.”

RAF boosters (and they're to be found under every bloody rock between here and Plymouth) are operating on "hope and change"....hope that they are never tasked with anything more strenuous than a Libya type campaign and change in the form that they think that someone will change the subject.

I won't let them.

The UK is a maritime nation and needs a strong Navy.  Not another repeat of failed Air Force centric thinking.

Fire Scout in Afghanistan/Growler carries AARGM

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. -- The Navy’s Fire Scout is proving its intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capability during its first land-based deployment in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility.

The Fire Scout, managed by Navy and Marine Corps Multi-Mission Tactical Unmanned Air Systems program office (PMA-266), deployed in late April to CENTCOM in response to a DoD ISR Task Force request to provide ISR services in northern Afghanistan.

In nine months, PMA-266, in conjunction with ISR task force leadership and Northrop Grumman, conducted site surveys of various basing locations, interfaced with key leadership personnel in the CENTCOM chain of command, planned and executed deployment preparations and sustainment for joint and allied military operations in Regional Command North, Afghanistan.

“We are very pleased with Fire Scout’s performance during both its ship-based and CENTCOM deployments,” said Capt. Tim Dunigan, PMA-266 Program Manager. “The team has done an exceptional job testing and maintaining the system to ensure we could meet the warfighter’s demands.”

Fire Scout’s initial flight in theater took place May 2. Only 19 days later, PMA-266 Detachment Alpha established initial operational capability during its first tasked mission from the International Security Assistance Force’s Regional Command North area of responsibility.

The Fire Scout system provides full motion video and imagery from its electro-optical and infrared sensor payload along with laser designation of targets for troops in the field. With flight endurance of more than five hours, the system offers a long-dwell sensor with real-time dynamic re-tasking capability to respond to tactical forces. Additionally, a communication relay capability provides a beyond-line-of-sight capacity for troops and their commanders.

“Our team is very excited about the first expeditionary deployment of the Fire Scout system”, said Cmdr. Brian Stephens, Officer in Charge (OIC) for PMA-266 Detachment Alpha. “In less than one month, we have flown more than 200 flight hours and completed more than 80 sorties and we are on track to fly 300 hours per month.”

PMA-266 Detachment Alpha is a government owned/contractor operated deployment. The detachment includes a military OIC and assistant OIC, five Navy intelligence analysts, and 21 Northrop Grumman contractors to conduct missions in support of RC North tasking.

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. -- The Navy’s Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) successfully completed its first test on the EA-18G Growler in China Lake, Calif. May 25.

A combined government/industry team conducted the EA-18G captive carry flight test in parallel with the ongoing AARGM Integrated Test & Evaluation phase on the FA-18 C/D aircraft.

Captive carry tests are simulated launches where the weapon stays on the aircraft. The team gathers information from sensors on the weapon to evaluate AARGM performance.

“AARGM is a very capable weapon performing a complex mission. VX-31 and VX-9 have done a superb job of carrying and testing the weapon on FA-18C/Ds as well as Super Hornets,” said Cmdr. Chad Reed, deputy program manager for Anti-Radiation Missiles within the Direct and Time Sensitive Strike program office (PMA-242). “AARGM has the potential to be a superb compliment, a force multiplier, in fulfilling current Growler missions.”

A complement to the existing AGM-88C High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM), AARGM provides the warfighter with a supersonic, air-launched tactical missile to be carried on the FA-18C/D, and Italian Air Force Tornado electronic countermeasures/reconnaissance aircraft.

“AARGM has demonstrated a much greater accuracy than our existing HARM inventory in striking hostile emitters,” Reed added. “The weapon is specifically designed to increase our warfighting capabilities in neutralizing enemy air defenses and will provide aircrews with an additional tool for the electronic attack mission.”

According to Reed, the successful integration of AARGM with the EA-18G on this milestone first flight, as well as with F/A-18E/F aircraft bodes well for the success of the program. AARGM has already flown more than 175 flight hours since November 2010, including 25 hours on Super Hornet and Growler aircraft.

Riverines and the Global Fleet Station.

I found out where Riverine Forces fell off the tracks.  The document below is from 2007 and gives a rough sketch of the Partnership missions that we see happening all over the globe.

Back in 2007 it was called Global Fleet Station (GFS).

GFS had at its core all the elements of the recently (then) formed NECC.

The recently established Naval Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) is a key enabler of theGFS concept. NECC brings together under a single command the existing forces andcapabilities of the Seabees, Explosive Ordnance Disposal, Naval Expeditionary LogisticsSupport, the Maritime Expeditionary Security Force, and Mobile Diving and Salvage. It has alsodeveloped new Navy capabilities such as Riverine, Maritime Civil Affairs, Security Training,and criminal intervention; all key elements of a full-spectrum engagement capability. Theintroduction of the new Foreign Area Officer (FAO) program further expands the Navy’senablers and capability to engage more effectively around the world in a culturally informed andmeaningful manner. In addition, the State Department new Surge POLAD program can enhanceparticipation and build awareness that can augment GFS interagency support

Read the entire document, but somewhere along the way every part of this plan came together except the Riverine forces.

Perhaps it had to do with equipment fit.

Perhaps it had to do with missions in Iraq.

Perhaps it had to do with a lack of flexibility on the part of the Riverine Command structure...but somewhere along the way, Riverine got kicked off the boat.  Why do I say that?  Because in every instance you see every part of NECC (with the exception of EOD which is quite busy in Afghanistan) afloat around the world on these missions.  Every part of NECC except Riverines.

Global Fleet Station Concept

What is the answer?

Well it certainly isn't floating a Riverine Command Boat into the well deck of an Amphib.  Flashy.  Yes.  Showboating.  Yes.  Practical.  No.

They have much smaller boats that they can operate and those should be the ones that they're demonstrating and deploying.

That is, if they actually want to deploy.

The answer is this.  Riverines are going to have to break down into detachment sized units and become part of ships crews on Destroyers and Frigates and forget the dream of having a mothership based on an Amphib that they can deploy a RCB from.

One other point needs to be made here though.

African Partnership Mission.

Riverine isn't there.

Joint Task Force Horn of Africa Mission.

Riverine isn't there.

Southern Partnership Mission.

Riverine isn't there.

The problem has been more than identified.  Solutions offered from hitching rides and deploying on MEU's, to providing detachments to Destroyers and Frigates on patrol.

Its up to the Riverine's to decide what there future holds...but unless they get deployed, it won't be a very bright one.

German Sea Basing?

I don't know if this is just an idea that they thought would look pretty to the USMC or if its actually something they're planning on implementing...

Personally.

I'll believe it when I see it.

German SeaBasing Concept Slides

Lexington Institute's take on the NATO situation

From Early Warning Blog...

It is not that NATO does not spend enough; it is rather that the Alliance and European Union spends badly. It spends an inadequate amount on R&D and procurement and overspends on personnel, including nondeployable forces. Then there is duplication of effort and investment in obsolescent capabilities. Europe has deployed three different fourth generation fighters, the Rafale, Typhoon and Gripen, while the U.S. leapt ahead to fifth generation aircraft, the F-22 and F-35. The U.S. is buying over 100 P-8 antisubmarine warfare aircraft; Europe is buying none. The U.S. already has deployed a fleet of C-17 long-range cargo aircraft while Europe is struggling to buy the shorter range A400. The list goes on and on: missile defenses, JDAMs, Small Diameter Bomb, AMRAAM, Global Hawk UAVs and directed energy weapons. Add to that critical enablers, particularly intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance and you have what it takes to be a modern military.
In his speech, the Secretary pointed out that several countries were spending only modestly in their militaries but still managed to “punch above their weight” in Libya. It is interesting that the nations he mentioned had all invested in U.S. systems, notably F-16 and F/A-18 aircraft. “In the Libya operation, Norway and Denmark have provided 12 percent of allied strike aircraft yet have struck about one third of the targets. Belgium and Canada are also making major contributions to the strike mission. These countries have, with their constrained resources, found ways to do the training, buy the equipment, and field the platforms necessary to make a credible military contribution.”

As usual, he makes a point but instead of going in for the kill (a trait common among too damn many bloggers in general and military bloggers in particular----when did being politically correct infect the military mind?) he vacillates and spins.

If only they spent money wiser.

Really?

Seriously?

It isn't about money its about mindset.  Goure knows this but instead gives NATO a fig leaf to hide behind.

I expected better but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.  Everyone knows that NATO is as dead as disco.  No one wants to say it out loud.

Cowards.