German govt fallout from a great tank competition performance?

via Defense 24.

Due to lack of funds in the budget Bundeswehr must abandon the purchase of new equipment, including tanks Leopard 2, the German army needed due to the tense situation in Ukraine - given the German newspaper "Bild".

From the confidential report financial experts Ministry of Defence, which refers to "Bild", it follows that both the purchase of new Leopards, and install a new tactical air defense system TLVs, not yet possible.
"Return on investment policy for the time being will not happen" - cites "Bild" expert opinion.

Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen intended - in connection with the threat from Russia - to increase the number of one hundred tanks.
Spending on the military do have to rise in 2017 of 1.7 billion euros, but almost half of this amount (750 million euros) will be allocated to salary increases.
Germany will not perform the target set at the last NATO summit in 2014 in Wales - an increase in defense spending to 2 percent. GDP and increase to 20 percent. the share of investments in the equipment in military spending.

I've been debating the fallout from the US Army loss in the tank competition.  A reader contends that the competitions mean nothing.  He further contends that the US and British tank forces have performed well where it counted...combat.

My rebuttal is that the US and its allies went up against forces that were at least a generation behind in all areas of tank technology.  Additionally in competitions where we are pitted against tanks that are equal to our own we aren't winning.

I also pointed out that you enter competitions to win them.  You don't go to "bolster" allied confidence by allowing them to win.  That sends the wrong message...especially in Europe where a good trouncing by US forces would point out the need for them to increase defense spending so that they match our own.

Before the ink was dry on that line of thinking I ran across the above article.  Is there a direct correlation?  Doubtful but it will provide ammunition to those in the German govt that argue that despite not meeting NATO budget goals they're able to match the US.  For better or worse we've given them an excuse to maintain current capabilities instead of improving.

13th MEU at Exercise Eager Lion 16, Jordan...pics by Sgt. Paris Capers

Botswana is buying Piranha III's with 30mm turrets and K2 Black Panther Main Battle Tanks?

via Tank and AFV News from IHS Janes.

Botswana’s The Sunday Standard newspaper reported in February that, in the wake of Khama’s visit to South Korea, the BDF was planning to spend BWP2 billion on eight T-50s and was also expected to buy K2 Black Panther tanks from South Korea.
More recently, on 16 May, the newspaper reported that the country was planning to spend nearly BWP2 billion on 45 Piranha 8×8 armoured vehicles made by General Dynamics Switzerland – presumably a reference to General Dynamics European Land Systems Mowag (GDELS-Mowag) – and turrets armed with 30 mm guns.
The BDF already uses Piranha III vehicles, 45 of which were delivered from 2003 .

This is T&AFVN's take.

Given the cost and complexity of the K2 Black Panther, this seems like a rather ambitious (and somewhat unrealistic) purchase for a country ranked only 118th in terms of GDP. Currently, the most capable MBT operated by a Central or Southern African country is the South African Olifant MBT, which is a significantly upgraded version of the venerable British Centurion tank.

I think that's putting it mildly.

In one purchase Botswana would go from being a typical African Army to being as gunned up as middle European power.

There has to be more going on here.  Was there a natural resource find that we're not aware of?  Is it simply a bit of bluster that has no substance?  Is it crazy funding from Mowag and the S. Korean govt to sell vehicles?

Either way this will be worth watching.

Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum Leopard 2 returning to base (pics)

While you're enjoying your weekend, Iraq is roiling in sectarianism.

Thanks to FNU Winarto for the link!

via Voice of America.

Baghdad's fortified International Zone was calm but tense Saturday following Friday's violence by protesters who defied bullets and tear gas to storm the area.
The city woke to the early morning sound of helicopters, most of them heading in and out of the highly secured section where Iraq's government buildings are located.
As demonstrators fled the gunfire and tear gas Friday afternoon, some carrying their injured friends away from the IZ, the anti-government protesters vowed they would return – but with weapons.
Many are followers of Shi’ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr who, like many of the political leaders in Iraq, has his own armed militia knows as the Peace Brigades.
Sadr has come out in support of what he describes as the people’s “revolution” against the government.

Has anyone noticed the rhythm of this thing?  Sadr's people conduct large demonstrations....they back off then we see suicide bombers...the govt almost cans its offensive against ISIS because they're scared shitless of getting hit in the capitol and US commanders talk sense to them so they continue....then Sadr's people hit again.

Its almost like they're coordinated!

Iraq from my chair seems like a hopeless situation.  No one wants to say civil war but that's exactly what Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan is when you boil it down to its most basic parts.

I wanted to look away but I can't. US Army Europe fails in tank competition.

Thanks to Pete for the link!

via RT.

American tank crews have failed to place in the Strong Europe Tank Challenge, a competition co-hosted and sponsored by US Army Europe. The three-day event gathered the best NATO crews to compete against each other in a set of armored warfare tests.
The Strong Europe Tank Challenge was jointly hosted from May 10 to 12 by the US Army and the German Bundeswehr at the Grafenwoehr Training Area in Germany. The three-day event involved crews from Denmark, Germany, Italy, Poland and Slovenia – which each sent platoons of four tanks – and the United States, which sent two platoons of four tanks.
The tank competition appears to be the first of its type to be held by NATO in Europe since 1991, the year the USSR dissolved. Designed to develop armored warfare skills, the tank challenge is also in line with the NATO trend of planning to counter what it calls an “assertive Russia.”
Crews taking part in the competition conducted either offensive or defensive operations, including an obstacle course with 13 different sections, a shooting competition, and tank-based navigation. The platoons were given points for each event in an effort to gain the highest score out of 1,000.
In one event, competing crews had to correctly identify 25 “friendly” and “threatening” vehicles while traveling around a course. Other events involved operating in the aftermath of a simulated chemical weapons attack, dealing with improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and managing medical emergencies, according to a US Army press release.

The German team took top honors, followed by the Danish tank crew in second. Third place went to Poland. The teams representing the US Army – which sponsored and advertised the event on social media – failed to make the top three.
Notably, all the teams were allowed to use tanks of slightly different types. The German platoon brought a Leopard 2A6, one of the best NATO-developed tanks that features a modified turret, enhanced mine resistance and a longer main gun barrel.

I've been chewing on this for days.  The usual anti-US muppets have been dropping this news in the comments section of this blog, I've gotten tons of e-mails about it....its been a major talking point.

But I wonder.

No excuses and the Army needs to tell us what went wrong.  As much as I pound on them I do expect excellence from our brother service.  Especially in armored warfare...MOST DEFINITELY in TANK WARFARE!

So what are some of the theories?  Some are saying that we didn't have the best crews available.  Others are saying that its a budget play and that the Army is using the contest to push the McMaster's  theme of the US falling behind other nations in armored warfare.  A few are saying that its a by product of bouncing soldiers around the globe...that this is just the latest example of how our forces are being eroded by too many deployments, training exercises etc...

I really don't know.  What I do know is that from what I've read the Germans and Poles skull stomped us and us beating the Italians was a close run thing.

Whatever the reason,  this is an unsatisfactory performance.  I wanted to look away but I can't.  US Army Europe needs to tell us  the how's, who's and what for's.

We own it now. The DDG-1000 is accepted for service.

Thanks to John for the link!

via DoD Live.

Today, the U.S. Navy accepted delivery of the most technically complex and advanced warship the world has ever seen. In just a matter of minutes, with a few key signatures and a small group of Navy and industry personnel present, this first in class, state of the art warship, which is the result of over 20 years of research, planning, development, construction, test and activation – shifted hands from the Bath Iron Works shipyard to our great Navy.

If the ship works as advertised then capable Naval Guns are back in vogue in the US Navy.  If any of the advancements in tech that are being talked about...lasers, rail guns, etc...are actually deliverable in the 2020-2030 timeframe then this ship will be a monster.

One thing is certain.

The US Navy just acquired a capability not found in any other navy on the surface of this planet.  A sidenote?  A Surface Action Group is now viable again.  A DDG-1000 accompanied by two or three Burkes, a couple of LCS and maybe a sub could actually be seen as a credible deterrent force in many littoral regions around the world.  Aircraft carriers can be saved for other engagements.

My only concern?  That tumblehome hull.  I remember reading  how concerned many were about its stability in rough seas.  I don't remember a credible defense of the hull design being put forth.  We'll see how it does  in the rough waters of the N. Atlantic or Pacific, but we should have an answer soon.

Marine Corps leadership is talking about a conventional war soon against a credible foe.

Something is brewing in Marine Corps land...especially at the General Officer level of Marine Corps land.  What am I talking about?  Check out what the Deputy Commandant said via USNI News....

Gen. John Paxton said potential adversaries are developing new technologies and tactics at accelerated speeds, and the U.S. needs to keep up.
“We used to pay attention to the Spratlys and the Paracels, but now we’ve got shoals and reefs that no one knew was out there, and they’re a lot bigger and a lot more permanent than they were two years ago. They threaten the [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea] and the freedom of navigation,” Paxton said during his speech of the South China Sea.
Afterward to reporters, he said of China and Russia, “we watch them in terms of their ability to integrate, their ability to accelerate, their ability to navigate. … There are areas where we believed we had a distinct advantage, and now we watch to see what they do. And this is more along watching what happened in Syria, what happened in Ukraine, what’s happening in the South China Sea, because they are evidencing capability, whether it’s offensive or defensive, that perhaps we hadn’t seen before … like [electronic warfare], like cyber.”
To prepare for whatever war comes next, potentially against these increasing capabilities the U.S. has seen from Russia and China, Paxton said repeatedly that the Marines need to “push the envelope” now.
“We need to keep pushing that envelop, both with our technologic purchases, what we do with operational test and evaluation, and what we do in a joint and combined arena so we have the ability to share techniques and share procedures and do command and control with allies and partners,” he said in his speech.

I find his comments noteworthy.  He was a personal favorite for Commandant and I've wondered why he's been so quiet.  But put that aside and recall the Commandant's words about two weeks ago...

“What’s the next fight going to be?” Neller asked.
“Inevitably we’ll guess wrong, but I think there’s some things we can say about what that next fight’s going to be. I think it’s going to be based on a maritime campaign: we’re going to fight with the Navy, we’re going to come from the sea, we’re going to seize some sort of naval base or maybe forward operating base. We may have to defend it against an enemy maritime threat. There may be eventually on that lodgment … sustained combat ashore. But I think our enemy is going to be different, I think it’s going to be a near-peer enemy. The enemy’s going to be networked, they’re going to jam our comms.”

Not to be outdone, check out what the Deputy Commandant for Aviation's words while on an F-35 stump speech via Havelock News.

 “The F-35 is quantitatively changing the way that we fly, much like the V-22 did,” said Davis. “When the big one happens, when the really big day happens, you are going to want your sons and daughters and your Marines to deploy from this base in the F-35 to go carry the day.”

I'll forgive the F-35 cheerleading and concentrate on the common theme.

You have the Commandant, Deputy Commandant, Deputy Commandant for Aviation all talking about a big war.  They're all talking about a "big" war that will tax resources and probably test wills.

I don't believe in coincidence.  So that means that Marine Corps planners have finally put the counter insurgency bug behind and are turning to on getting ready to fight a major conventional war.

I don't know whether to chest thump and say I told you so, or be chilled by the implications.

A major conventional war within the next 5-10 years?

The US isn't ready.

This is one time when I hope I'm wrong.  This is one time when I hope that this is just a passion play to get more budget.  If it isn't then that means the Corps "big thinkers" have seen what I have (with a 1000% more clarity) and know that time is short.  Still.  Even with a 5-10 year window....we won't be ready...not at current spending levels.

Flight Global agrees with my assessment about the JPO break up!

Remember my post on the 17th of this month?  I said this...

I stand ready to be corrected on this but from my chair it looks like a major part of the F-35 business and operating plan has just been blown up by the Senate.

If this proposal survives and I see no reason why it won't then the dream of "duplicate" capabilities across the F-35 line, across services and nations is about to go the way of the dinosaur.

This has huge implications.

First it decimates the potential earnings of Lockheed Martin. If you owned stock in that company then you better be calling your people now! 25% of LM revenue is projected to come from continuing upgrades of the F-35. This move throws open the door to other players coming in. Next it also makes the idea of other people doing the "Israeli" thing of demanding some type of accommodation to do local upgrades more likely. The other big thing is that by killing the program office after it finishes development means the planning for block upgrades is essentially dead...each service will do its own thing...certain versions will be cleared to carry only a few of the weapons...costs will increase, the numbers bought reduced, and there will be no savings because of scale (as if there ever were).

The dream that was the F-35 died today, May 17, 2015.

I got tremendous pushback but it seems like Flight Global agrees with me.  Check this out...

Make no mistake: McCain is not making a good faith attempt to improve F-35 bureaucracy. His proposal is a calculated ploy to divide and conquer. The JPO consolidates management of three major F-35 variants ­developed in partnership by one set of nine countries and acquired so far by a different set of nine countries. To disband that organisation is to weaken the power of the programme it oversees.
Some would rejoice. As the most expensive weapon system in history, the F-35 programme has many ­adversaries, jealous of its funding and priority during budget wrangles. It is not irrelevant that the JPO failed in its real purpose. Tasked to keep the three F-35 variants up to 90% common, these so-called sister aircraft today share only about 25% of their part numbers.
A vote to disband the JPO now, however, is not a bid to improve programme management – it is phase one of a scheme to destroy the F-35.

Read the entire article!  F-35 fanboys be advised.  The F-35 program isn't going on this crusade to send fighters to the Netherlands, UK, and Italy this summer on a whim.  You're not seeing F-35's at airshows across the US because the military thinks its a nice idea.  General Davis isn't showing up in backwater South Carolina because he likes the woods....

Its because the F-35 program is in serious trouble.  And I for one couldn't be happier!

SAAB claimed that its Giraffe 4A AESA Radar could detect stealth aircraft in 2014!

We're all gun guys...Tank/Armored Vehicle guys....Helicopter guys...we have some Ship guys and a few of us are airplane (I mean TRUE) guys.

Not many of us (at least from what I can tell) are skooled in radars, electronics, avionics, etc.  Which is why we miss the latest and greatest from the nerd field of warfare.

I've made the claim that stealth is becoming obsolete.  I posted an article that quoted an official with the F-35 program stating that stealth could be detected by high end Russian/Chinese systems.

I was criticized by the usual suspects.

So for the doubters I present the above video.  Its from 2014 and if you

don't have time fast forward to 1:38 seconds.  The claim?  That the SAAB Giraffe 4A AESA Radar can detect stealth at long distance. 

The tech is marching on tribe members.  I ignored many of you when you said that Raytheon's breakthrough with Gallium Nitride was a game changer.  The US has a domestic manufacturer that is producing radars that can detect stealth too.  What I missed in the press release was this very lowkey claim...

A semiconductor material that can efficiently amplify high power radio frequency signals at microwave frequencies, GaN produces five times the power of gallium arsenide (GaAs) technology, which is still used in concert with GaN. Raytheon continues to invest in the development of both GaAs and GaN at the Radio Frequency Components (RFC) Foundry in Andover.

“The greater sensitivity for an antenna array built with GaN components means it can detect and track objects at much further distances,” said Mike Borkowski, technical director at the Radio Frequency Components foundry.

Raytheon was practically screaming that they had a radar that could track stealth but the defense media missed it.

Stealth might not be dead but its executioner has walked into the room.

1-2 SBCT, 7th Infantry Division "Ghost Brigade" National Training Center Wrap Up Vid....

Wrap up my ass.  Those soldiers are gonna be cleaning weapons and vehicles for a week!

Centauro II, the Italian F-35, the Leopard II and what does the Italian Army want to be....

This Defense News article is fascinating. Check out these passages...

Dottori said the Army might find additional funding in the 2016 budget if Italian Defence Minister Roberta Pinotti makes good on her promise to reduce spending on the joint strike fighter (JSF) program following criticism of the program from within the Italian Parliament.

Then this...

Germano Dottori, a lecturer in strategic studies at Rome’s LUISS University, said that Italian Army generals might also be routing for a new battle tank.
“What they might be better off buying are Leopard II tanks, which is what the generals want,” Dottori said.
The Army is now down to about 30 functioning Arietes — its main battle tank — after savage cuts to maintenance budgets left many tanks without parts and out of service, he said.
Dottori said the Leopard II had recently beaten the Ariete in a NATO firing test, upping its reputation in Italy.
“If Italy wanted to go into Libya, its hands would be tied because it does not have battle tanks,” he said.

This is awesome!  The Italians are one of the main proponents of wheeled vehicles but even they seem to be questioning the wisdom and that Tank Competition that the US Army participated in that I've been doing my very best to ignore their 4th place finish, is actually playing a role in their decision making.

I wonder a few things.  If the Italian Generals actually want Leopard II's then who's pushing the Centauro upgrade?  Why haven't we heard more about the Italian defense minister's promise to cut the F-35?  How bad are things in the Italian Army to be down to 30 Ariete Main Battle Tanks?

This bears watching.