Inconvenience vs. Problems...not defense related but cool...

We should all learn the difference between an inconvenience and a problem.  Check out the guys over at Zen Pencils..it should give perspective...plus I like the prints...

Tactical Armored Patrol Vehicle winner announced today.

Thanks Jonathan for the heads up!

Force Protection Timberwolf.

Oshkosh TAPV.

RG-35

Textron TAPV.

Well its that time.

The Canadians are about to announce the winner of their Tactical Armored Patrol Vehicle competition.  No predictions on the winner...we'll all find out later today...but I THINK it'll come down to the RG-35 and the Textron TAPV.  This is a weird requirement though.  Combining the roles of recon and utility in one vehicle?  Seems....weird.

AMPV? Just roll with the Improved Bradley.

The AMPV program is designed to replace the M-113 in US Army service.

Goure of the Heritage Institute thinks that this program is even more important than the GCV...I agree...and because I agree its time for the Army to get on the ball and get'er done.  When we're talking about replacing the M-113, we're talking about replacing a family of those vehicles.

Of all the contenders in the AMPV program, only the Improved Bradley makes sense.  Its modular, its a single platform and the Army already has experience with it.  With budget cuts coming, with budget competition already here and with the threat of becoming irrelevant looming over all Army programs it is time to move quickly.

I said before, I'll say it again.  Get'er done.

SIDENOTE:  On the lookout for pics of the turretless Bradley (Bradley General Purpose Vehicle). 

baes_020079

Grunt Works on Facebook.

NOTE:  I'm not a fan of FaceBook.  Never have, never will be.  Additionally I'll never understand why entities continue to use that platform instead of getting a decent website up and running.  But (there is always a but) I make exceptions for the truly great.  Grunt Works fits the bill.  Check'em out....

Pics of the day. The DoD world wide...

A C-130 Hercules aircraft takes off during Joint Operations Access Exercise (JOAX) 12-2 at Fort Bragg, N.C., June 5, 2012. A JOAX is a joint airdrop exercise designed to enhance service cohesiveness between U.S. Army and Air Force personnel, allowing both services an opportunity to properly execute large-scale heavy equipment and troop movement. (DoD photo by Senior Airman Alexandra Hoachlander, U.S. Air Force/Released)

U.S. Sailors assigned to Riverine Squadron (RIVRON) 1 and Indonesian sailors with Kopaska, an underwater demolition unit, conduct combat patrol, first aid and boarding exercises in Surabaya, Indonesia, June 5, 2012, during Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) Indonesia 2012. CARAT is a series of bilateral exercises held annually in Southeast Asia to strengthen relationships and enhance force readiness. (DoD photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist Aaron Glover, U.S. Navy/Released)

U.S. Army Capt. Geoffrey Lynch, right, the headquarters commander with the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, discusses operations and tactics with Montenegrin army Lt. Ratko Cosovic after a field training exercise during the Immediate Response 2012 training event in Slunj, Croatia, June 5, 2012. Immediate Response is a U.S. Army Europe-led combined joint tactical field training exercise designed to build interoperability between NATO, Croatia and its regional partner nations. (DoD photo by Spc. Lorenzo Ware, U.S. Army/Released)

U.S. Army Pfc. Tyler Woodward, assigned to the 27th Engineer Battalion, braces for a landing at the Normandy drop zone at Fort Bragg, N.C., for an airlift mission during a joint operational access exercise (JOAX) June 4, 2012. A JOAX is a joint airdrop exercise designed to enhance service cohesiveness between U.S. Army and Air Force personnel, allowing both services an opportunity to properly execute large-scale heavy equipment and troop movement. (DoD photo by Staff Sgt. Austin Pritchard, U.S. Air Force/Released) 

The guided missile cruiser USS San Jacinto (CG 56) approaches the amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD 3), not pictured, during a replenishment at sea in the Atlantic Ocean June 6, 2012. Kearsarge was under way participating in Afloat Training Group basic phase training. (DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Tommy Lamkin, U.S. Navy/Released)

UK airsofters rejoice!

I wondered why the UK Ministry of Defence would put out these pics of a Soldier in full kit.  All I could come up with is that it must be for the air soft crowd.  So...airsofters rejoice!

Posed image of a soldier with the 2nd Battalion, The Royal Highland Fusiliers in Afghanistan wearing full combat dress.

KIT: (Top to bottom)
-Mark 7 Combat Helmet with Multi-Terrain Pattern (MTP) helmet cover.
-Helmet Mounted Night Vision System (HMNVS)
-ESS ballistic eye protection.
-MTP Under Body Armour Combat Shirt (UBACS)
-Mark4 Osprey Body Armour with medical pouch (left) ammunition pouch (right), admin pouch (front) and MTP cover.
-Personal Role Radio (PRR).
-SA80 A2 Small Arms Weapon System, with Advanced -Optical Gun Sight (ACOG) and Underslung Grenade Launcher (UGL).
-Tier 2 Pelvic Protection, Tier 1 pelvic protection worn underneath trousers.
-MTP trousers
-Black Hawk Knee Pads.
-LOWA combat boots.
Photographer: Sgt Rupert Frere RLC

Combined Action Program in Afghanistan...old is new again.

Go here to read about the Vietnam era Combined Action Program...do a mental comparison between how we're fighting in Afghanistan to this old concept.

"I would like to believe, with some, that combined action was the best thing we did... ...In my experience, combined action was merely one more untenable article of faith. The truth, I suspect, is that where it seemed to work, combined action wasn't really needed, and where it was, combined action could never work."
Major Edward Palm

Today in history. D-Day. A seaborne invasion and where were the Marines?

From Black Five..via National Review....

...In the Atlantic, Marines had trained Army forces for seaborne landings prior to the North African campaign in 1942, and then made landings during the same. Marines trained Army forces for the Sicilian-Italian landings in 1943. Marine Corps amphibious experts were on Ike’s staff. And most Normandy-bound Army units were in fact instructed by Marines prior to the 1944 invasion.
So why didn’t U.S. Marines storm the French coast with their Army counterparts?
First, the Marine Corps was then–as it has always been–much smaller than the Army. During World War II, the Corps swelled to a force comprising six divisions, whereas the Army expanded to 89 divisions. The Corps’ resources were stretched thin, and much of its efforts were focused on the fighting in the Pacific.

Second, a deep-seeded rivalry between the Army and Marines was in full bloom: Its origins stretching back to World War I; the defining period of the modern Marine Corps.

Following the 1918 Battle of Belleau Wood (France), in which Marines played a leading role, newspapers in the U.S. credited much of the success of the American Expeditionary Force to the Marines. This occurred at the expense of deserving Army units even when referring to actions in which Marines did not participate.

In one instance, a number of newspapers covering the fighting at the Marne River bridges at Chateau-Thierry (a few days prior to the Battle of Belleau Wood) published headlines that read “Germans stopped at Chateau-Thierry with help of God and a few Marines.” The headlines contributed to the Corps’ already legendary reputation, and the Army was justifiably incensed. The Germans in fact had been stopped at Chateau-Thierry by the U.S. Army’s 7th machinegun battalion.
Army leaders–including Generals George C. Marshall, Eisenhower, and Omar N. Bradley–were determined not to be upstaged by Marines, again. Thus, when America entered World War II in late 1941, the Marine Corps was deliberately excluded from large-scale participation in the European theater. And when the largest amphibious operation in history was launched, it was for all intents and purposes an Army show...

The article is fascinating and filled in a chapter of Marine Corps history that I always wondered about but got few satisfying answers.

Read the entire thing, but one thing is certain...The US Army...more precisely, all the units assigned to take the beach that day performed magnificently.  They deserve full credit.

But it is nice knowning why Marines...masters of the amphibious assault...didn't take part.  One last tidbit.  Originally spoken by Patton but revised in the role by George C. Scott (a Marine)...

Patton said, “The quicker we clean up this g**damned mess, the quicker we can take a little jaunt against the purple pissing Japs and clean out their nest, too. Before the g**damned Marines get all of the credit.”

Ah...sweet interservice rivalry.  It makes us all step a bit quicker, be a bit better and work just a bit harder.

Memorial Run.

Photos by Cpl. Reece Lodder

F-35 News. 06.06.12

A little F-35 news to set the proper tone for the week for all those deluded fools that actually think this airplane isn't every bit the gamechanger I claim...

First from the Why the F-35 Blog....

The veteran F-16 operational tester and Weapons School grad shared some of his impressions the F-35. The jet is powerful, stable and easy to fly.
"One of the things this aircraft usually takes hit on is the handling because it's not an F-22," Kloos says. "An F-22 is unique in its ability to maneuver and we'll never be that."
But compared to other aircraft, a combat-configured F-35 probably edges out other existing designs carrying a similar load-out. "When I'm downrange in Badguyland that's the configuration I need to have confidence in maneuvering, and that's where I think the F-35 starts to edge out an aircraft like the F-16," Kloos says.
A combat-configured F-16 is encumbered with weapons, external fuel tanks, and electronic countermeasures pods that sap the jet's performance. "You put all that on, I'll take the F-35 as far as handling characteristic and performance, that's not to mention the tactical capabilities and advancements in stealth," he says. "It's of course way beyond what the F-16 has currently."
The F-35's acceleration is "very comparable" to a Block 50 F-16. "Again, if you cleaned off an F-16 and wanted to turn and maintain Gs and [turn] rates, then I think a clean F-16 would certainly outperform a loaded F-35," Kloos says. "But if you compared them at combat loadings, the F-35 I think would probably outperform it."

Read the whole thing but that puts a fork into the heart of the Bill Sweetmans and Carlos Kopps that claim that the F-35 can't compete with 4th gen fighters. 
 

From US News DotMil Blog...

 So when the F-22 oxygen system flaws led Panetta to step in, there were whispers in defense circles that the F-35 might be prone to spawning the same pilot wooziness.
Lockheed Martin responded to DOTMIL after multiple requests for comment, sounding a confident tone.
"They are different systems," Lockheed spokesman Michael Rein says. "The F-35 and F-22 have common aircraft oxygen system suppliers but the systems are very different...The two systems each utilize a similar approach and architecture, but they are packaged and implemented differently.
"The F-35 program continuously monitors issues present in other aircraft assessing applicability to our current design," Rein says. "The program has leveraged the lessons learned from F-22 development to enhance the F-35 across all subsystems, including the Onboard Oxygen Generating System."

Another punch in the gut to the critics.  Different system so NO.  The F-35 will not be affected by whatever is wrong with the F-22.

Next we have Element of Power Blog... 

The Concurrency Bogeyman is not going to disappear until people who use it get called out for their lies, so 'good on' Bucci and the Heritage foundation!
Awww. The Usual F-35 Hatin' Suspects seem to have shown up at the Heritage site with their usual quiver full of lies, half-truths, and distortions. How quaint. They range from ignorant to stupid-but they're quaint. Around here people say 'Bless their hearts' when we see that kind of lunacy.

Three different blogs...all come to the same conclusion.  And if all that isn't enough, the testing program is rolling full speed ahead...

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – Cmdr. Eric Buus brings F-35C Joint Strike Fighter test aircraft CF-3 in for a landing at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., May 29. The flight was the 300th flight for the F-35’s carrier variants and evaluated improvements in flight control laws for carrier approaches. The F-35C carrier variant of the Joint Strike Fighter is distinct from the F-35A and F-35B variants with its larger wing surfaces and reinforced landing gear to withstand catapult launches and deck landing impacts associated with the demanding aircraft carrier environment. The F-35C is undergoing test and evaluation at NAS Patuxent River prior to delivery to the fleet.