First Fusiliers Battlegroup at exercise Prairie Storm (Canada) ....pics by Corporal James McAllister

NOTE:  I found these pics interesting because of how the British soldiers wear their kit.  Its heavily biased toward what we would call a "battle belt".  As a matter of fact we don't see the type of chest rigs that are so popular in US forces.  The Brits are just as mechanized as we are.  They do air assault in much the same way.  Why haven't they jumped full force on the chest rig movement?  They seem to have dabbled a bit and then went back to their normal way of doing things.  What do they know that they're not telling us?

A MUST READ! Our enemies have had over 2 decades to prepare for the F-35...

Thanks to Charley for the heads up!

via National Review...

Well understood anti-stealth tactics, combined with networked passive sensors, will allow peer enemies flying faster, aerodynamically superior planes to get the first shot in at ranges 30 to 40 percent greater than that of the F-35’s missiles. The point is that potential future enemies, given decades to prepare, have done so. That we would expect anything different is just plain silly.

And this....

Brazen claims of future F-35 dominance are legion, but real evidence to support such claims is nonexistent. Nonetheless, the fact that such claims are being made by people with a lot of gold braid carries a lot of weight. That it is politically expedient to believe such claims helps explain the F-35 program’s continued existence. So where does that leave us? In business, there is the concept of a sunk cost. The idea is to disregard past investments, both financial and emotional, and make the decision on whether to continue with the project on the basis of what will yield the most value for the stakeholders going forward. Right now the F-35’s sunk cost is massive in terms of money, time, pride, reputations, and emotion. While it is likely that some of the technologies being incorporated into the F-35 are useful, incorporating these technologies into several superior platforms that optimally address the diverse requirements of the three jet-flying services has a much better net present value. Consequently it is time to pull the plug on the biggest threat to U.S military power — the F-35.

The F-35 is destroying the US military in general and the USMC in particular.

In a world ran by competent leadership, the Marines would have put the F-35 at the end of its procurement train and instead funded projects that work.  The ACV would have been done.  The CH-53K would be in production.

We would be waiting to see if the F-35 would work AND be affordable.

Instead leadership has gone all in on the F-35.

Reputations, both personal and institutional will be wrecked because of this hubris.

Worse?

We are placing our nation and those of our allies at risk on a whim, a prayer and a hope that Lockheed Martin can make this dead duck fly.

F-35 is endangering the Marine Air-Ground Team...is it unfortunately time to do away with fast jets in the Corps?

I was doing a quick review of some of the stuff I've read on the F-35 and one theme keeps popping up that isn't getting proper attention.  There are a few people in leadership (influenced by SLDInfo and others) that are actively talking about leaving the Ground Combat Element on the dock and sailing big deck LHDs with only F-35's aboard.

Think about that for a minute.

There are some in the USMC that seek to break the Air-Ground Task Force concept that has been the hallmark of USMC operations for years.....all to justify the F-35!

Don't believe me?  Check this out!  via USNI News....

But Davis, a former Harrier pilot, said he’s thinking much bigger and believes, based on the operational test, that the ship could handle many more jets.
“Could we go out with 16 and four tiltrotors?” he said, noting that the Marines would soon be adding a roll-on/roll-off package onto the MV-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft so they could act as a tanker.
“So I could actually now take 16 F-35s on that ship, more on an America-class ship, plus some V-22 tankers, and I have a fifth-generation strike capability in numbers if we needed to do that,” he said.
“We haven’t assessed that – we’ve looked at six, and we’d probably want to look at it again, how would we do with more. And I think we leave that up to our Marine Corps leadership and Navy leadership and national leadership to say, how do we maximize the capability of this particular machine and this particular capability for the nation.”

THINK ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS HERE!

I've worried about the USMC becoming a sea going 101st, but if the Assistant Commandant for Aviation has his way then we'll be lucky to have a ground element at all!

The incoming Commandant (we'll talk about all the churn that has been caused by this deep dig for our next Marine Corps leader and the trouble that this administration is hoisting on the Corps soon...I'm still wrapping my head around the names and running down all the joint billets that are filled by Marine stars) has one task.

He needs to put our house in order.

Aviation is out of control.  He either reigns them in and makes them a SUPPORTING, NOT SUPPORTED part of the team or its time to consider doing away with fast jets in the Marine Corps.

Neo-Nazi's a threat to Ukraine/Poland?

Thanks to Super Rhino for the link.

via Sputnik

The Ukrainian militant group Right Sector poses a serious threat to Poland and nearby European countries, Polish politician Miroslaw Orzechowski told Sputnik.
Right Sector's ideology is based on the ultra-nationalist principles of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) led by Stepan Bandera during World War II and in the postwar period. Among other horrendous war crimes, the UPA terrorized Polish territories, ethnically-cleansing Poles from Volhynia and Eastern Galicia regions.
"This [ultranationalist] ideology is flourishing in contemporary circumstances in Europe…For Poland, Right Sector…is especially dangerous," Orzechowski said.

Here.

Interesting.  I don't quite understand it but the Nazi ideology has appeal in the very countries that suffered when the "originals" were around.

I can see (not condone but understand) how a nation under stress and needing fighters could turn to unsavory groups for assistance...but Nazis?

If this is true and this becomes widely known then Ukraine is toast.

Support will dry up.  I know I'll find it hard to support that nation if its just another front for new age national socialist.

MV-22's aboard the BPC Dixmude (L9015).... photos by Staff Sgt. Miguel Carrasco

The AAV. The US Marines 70 year old (planned) combat vehicle!

via The Marines Amphibious Combat Vehicle site.

We have parallel survivability upgrade and sustainment programs in place to improve protection and performance of a portion (392) of the AAV fleet so that it will continue to serve as the primary amphibious mobility platform until the fleet is replaced entirely by a modern capability. AAV Upgrade meets surface assault echelon capacity requirements for two MEBs while mitigating a force protection gap in capability.
This program will start in FY 19, though some aspects such as electrical and communications system upgrades are already being addressed, and will extend their the service life through at least 2035. The AAV Upgrade Program will improve the force protection of the personnel carrier variant of the AAV, specifically its underbelly protection against explosive threats. In addition, the AAV Modification and Sustainment will focus on safety upgrades, replacement of obsolete components, and improvements to interoperability, reliability, maintainability, and availability extending the life and operational relevance of the AAV.

The AAV will serve through AT LEAST 2035!

Drink that in.

Marines will ride the AAV into combat through AT LEAST 2035!

Yes.  I'm repeating myself, but that would be like sending Marines into Gulf War 2 in LVT-2's! 

Have you thought about it?  Do you get the force of connection with this issue yet?  Tell me again that this isn't foolish risk.  Tell me again that I'm wrong about this being a basic leadership failure.  Make a compelling argument that the course of action being taken is the right one.

You can't,  because the modernization plan for Marine Corps armor is batshit crazy.  Future Marines will die and it will be because we're sending them out in geriatric vehicles that should be in museums.

The F-35 is NOT worth the disruption that its bringing to the Marine Corps budget.  Its just not.

120mm Expeditionary Fire Support System (EFSS)

Question.

Does anyone know how the 120mm mortar became the cat's meow?  At one time all the rapid deployment forces were sold on the 105mm howitzer, in particular the British model (I'm not sure but I believe it was the 119 something...not gonna look it up right now).  How and why the change?

We know who the Amphibious Combat Vehicle competitors are...

via Janes.

Key Points

• Two solutions are to be chosen from offerings by ADVS, BAE Systems, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, and SAIC

• ACV 8x8 armoured personnel carriers are meant to 'swim' some distance to shore, and USMC leaders say prototype trials so far have proven that capability

The US Marine Corps (USMC) will soon downselect two designs for its Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) programme, and the prospective next USMC commandant is sanguine about the prototypes' in-water capabilities.

The rest of its behind a paywall and I'm not subscribed, but I did a quick search for ADVS and its here. 

The surprises?  Lockheed Martin actually has the audacity and the USMC allowed them to enter this program after the corporate espionage they engaged in.

Lockheed Martin is without honor.  The Marine Corps should have a care.  If the company you're dealing with will cheat a partner then they will sell you shoddy gear.

Where I'm sitting it looks like a BAE vs. SAIC contest if swimming is the most important or even a very important factor.

If it turns into a cost blow out then you need to add General Dynamics to the mix.  BAE and SAIC would stay in because they'll play hardball too.

In my opinion Lockheed Martin stands virtually no chance and that's as it should be....but what about ADVS?  Actually I just don't know.  I do know you never bet against little guys.  Those are the bastards that will surprise you when you underestimate them.

We'll see what we'll see.

5 Amphibious Combat Vehicle competitors?

via Breaking Defense.

The committee’s questions show a certain skepticism of this proposed Amphibious Combat Vehicle. Will the “four foreign designs” being evaluated have adequate mobility through the water? Well, Neller responds, there are actually five designs, only two of them non-US. Of those five, he says, “we are confident that at least two” — the number required for a second-phase competition later this year — “[will] achieve water mobility performance on par with or greater than our existing [AAV].”

Here.

As usual the reporters for the traditional media missed it.  Five instead of four?  Lets do the rundown again....

1.  General Dynamics.
2.  SAIC/STKinetics
3.  BAE/IVECO
4.  Lockheed Martin/Patria

So who is the 5th?  Additionally the Lockheed Martin/Patria offering is supposedly off according to Patria.

So what the fuck gives?

Additionally these were suppose to be off the shelf designs!  So who could be the fifth?  The same little birdy that told me about Lockheed Martin subterfuge stated that they were working on a vehicle so maybe the plan to backstab their partner was already in motion and they put a vehicle into service.

But what if it isn't Lockheed Martin?  Who else has an amphibious wheeled vehicle that could be offered?  VBCI?  Doesn't swim.  Boxer?  Nope.  Could BAE have dusted off the SEP design and used the 8x8 to enter solo?  Possibility...not sure.

This is curious.

M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) in action at Talisman Sabre 2015...vid by Tech. Sgt. James Stewart