Gates and the force structure review.

Wow.

How can so many people be so wrong about so simple an issue.

Yes Secretary Gates ordered a force structure review.

No, the Secretary is not talking about "killing" the Marines.  More the opposite.  Take this for example...

Since then, Marines have fought on the beaches, mountains and trenches of Korea, the highlands and rice paddies of Vietnam, and the deserts of Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan. Although many of these operations saw Marines initially projected from the sea, “they soon turned into long, grinding, ground engagements,” Gates said.
The nation does not need a second land army, Gates said, but rather forces that can deploy quickly and sustain themselves for a short period of time.

Sounds like he is endorsing the work already done by the current Commandant to get the Marines feet wet again.

But just to show that I am paying attention, this is the part where many are all-a-twitter...

“Looking ahead, I do think it is proper to ask whether large-scale amphibious landings along the lines of Inchon (Korea in 1950) are feasible,” the secretary said. Anti-access technologies, such as more accurate cruise and ballistic missiles, will work to drive the starting point for amphibious operations farther and farther out to sea.
All will gain from a serious and balanced look at military missions, with an emphasis on balance, Gates said. “The United States will continue to face a diverse range of threats that will require a flexible portfolio of military capabilities,” he said. The military must be equally adept in counterinsurgency and full-spectrum operations. Any enemy is going to confront perceived American weaknesses, and how the military responds to asymmetric tactics must be considered, he added.

The funny thing here is that Forcible Entry in general and Amphibious Assault in particular has been reaffirmed once again.  This is honestly a shot at only one part of the Marine Corps and that's the EFV.  This entire speech was a thinly veiled shot across the bow at a weapon system and not the Marine Corps.

If anything, this is showing that Gates is willing to play hardball with the Marines when it comes to the fight for that vehicle.

I wonder what the powers that be are going to do for a counter move over in Quantico.  This will get ugly.

An RAF test pilot speaks about the F-35.

via AviationNews.EU.

As the UK public got its first glimpse of the RAF’s stunning Harrier replacement at Farnborough, Squadron Leader Steve Long said:
“It is like an iPhone on speed. It is a quantum leap in terms of technology and aerodynamics.”

'Nuff said.

Read the whole thing here.

Another confusing article on the F-35 engine debate.

I'm a fan of aviation.  I have no actual experience with it (outside of riding in the back of helicopters and cursing the pilots and crew chiefs for seeming to try and make me sick or because the damn thing leaks fluid like a new born baby pees its pants)...so articles like this don't help one bit in trying to determine who's right or wrong.

Take these segments of Guy Norris' article in Aviation Week...

The intense battle over powering the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter could be heading to new levels following test results that show the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136 alternate engine has more than 15% thrust margin against specification, significantly exceeding the power of the baseline Pratt & Whitney F135.

and then this later on...

“Initial results show we have more than 15% margin at sea level combat-rated thrust than the specification. That’s significantly beyond the thrust requirement right out of the chute,” says GE-Rolls. In March this year, following the first maximum afterburner test of a system development and demonstration engine, the team quietly expressed confidence the F136 would exceed the thrust of the baseline F135 by 5%. Actual thrust achieved in the test remains undisclosed, but it is in excess of 40,000 lb.

So for an observer and not expert, I'm left with the thought that...ok, the F136 produces 5% more thrust than the F135...but haven't we known that all along?

I'm not an engine guy (there actually is a guy that goes by that name over on F-16.net...maybe I should ask him) but I believe it has to do with engine cores or something like that.  But I'm off topic.  The point is that this article didn't clear up a thing for me, and  it actually muddied the waters.  Read it for yourself here. 

Another great photo stream on Flickr.

Think Defence first brought his photos to my attention and while I've been admiring them for a while, I finally decided to share them here with you.

Just like Stremph's excellent photos covering aviation, Brian Aitenhead has covered the maritime environment.  If you get a chance spend an hour or two looking over his offerings.  They're both well worth your time.

HMS Ocean transiting the Suez Canal

HMS Ocean leaving the Suez Canal

Now if I could only figure out what this guy does for a living to be able to take all these cool photos!

C-5M first flight.

Thank God this program is finally going.  We shouldn't have to rely on the Russians for outsized cargo.  Via Lockheed Martin.

Identify please.

The above photo is from the Air Combat Command and a recent exercise where B-52's and F-15's dropped everything from GBU-28's to Small Diameter Bombs.

Really basic stuff that is done everyday.

What I need help with is the pod hanging between (I believe) the 1st and 2nd engines on the above photo.

What is it?

BAE is promoting Band Tracks.

While doing my usual weekend surfing I ran across a slight change in the BAE list of offerings.

Its seems that they're now promoting Band Tracks and have them listed separately under the Combat Vehicle section.  According to BAE, Band Tracks offer...

Band track is a high-performance, low-maintenance alternative for the segmented metal track traditionally used for tracked combat vehicles. Lightweight rubber composite, band track travels smoothly around suspension components with minimal vibration and noise.

With the wheeled combat vehicles having shown their limitations in moderate combat (I know the silliness of that designation but currently high intensity combat would mean operations against a technological capable enemy...the Taliban and Insurgents just don't qualify) the after market for this type of track might be large.

The only question I would have is...how do you fix it if you throw one when you're out in the boonies???