Tuesday, December 07, 2010
Weep and Whine Haters...the F-35B lives!
Defense Secretary Robert Gates will recommend giving the Marine Corps as much as two additional years to develop its version of Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 fighter to correct technical and manufacturing glitches that have delayed testing, according to two defense officials.We won't get our birds in 2012 but the Harrier will do until then...good news...now we just have to save the EFV and all is well in procurement.
Gates told General James Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, of the decision in a Dec. 3 meeting on the fiscal 2012 budget, according to the officials, who asked not to be identified because the session wasn’t public.
F-35A (AF3) takes off...
Dingo 2 not loved by Norway's Troops.
Thanks Jonathan!
via Defense News...
“Wow. I always had a neutral opinion of the Dingo 2 and at worst thought it was as good as the other MRAPs out there. Now I'm not so sure. Hopefully a European reader will be able to let us know if this is politics or an actual issue.
In Norway, Anger Over Dingo Vehicle Buy
By GERARD O’DWYER
HELSINKI — The Norwegian government’s decision to “rush through” an order for 20 Dingo 2 armored personnel vehicles has drawn accusations from opposition parties that the Ministry of Defense (MoD) picked a vehicle type spurned by its ground forces in Afghanistan.
On Nov. 18, the opposition conservative party, Høyre, sent 13 questions to the ministry, expressing doubts that the Dingo 2 would offer adequate protection.
“We want to know why so much money was spent on a vehicle which our troops in Afghanistan do not feel safe in,” said Ivar Kristiansen, a Høyre representative on the Norwegian parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. “There is also the risk that the Dingo 2 may be used as a route-clearing vehicle. It has never been used by any force in such a role.” In a Nov. 26 written response, Defense Minister Grete Faremo defended the decision but conceded that defense chief Gen. Harald Sunde had expressed a preference for U.S. company Oshkosh’s MRAP all-terrain vehicle (M-ATV).
Faremo said the selection was made by Forsvarets Logistikkorganisasjon (FLO), Norway’s defense logistics organization, and endorsed by Forsvarets Operative Hovedkvarter, the armed forces’ operational headquarters.
She said the Dingo 2 was the best available vehicle for improving Norwegian forces’ overall protection against improvised bombs and other explosives. Delaying the purchase would expose Norwegian soldiers to an unnecessary and unacceptable high risk, she said.
“This has been a rapid acquisition under severe time pressure, and I’m happy with the result,” Faremo said in her statement. “I recognize that not all our soldiers in Afghanistan agree with the choice of vehicle, but I must emphasize that the Dingo 2 was the only acceptable option that could be deployed now.” Faremo said the FLO would test the Dingo 2’s suitability for clearing routes.
On Oct. 29, the MoD signed an initial $25 million contract for 20 Dingo 2s with Germany’s Krauss-Maffei Wegmann. Three weeks later, the first vehicle entered service with Norway’s troops in Afghanistan.
The quick move angered opposition groups and divided military opinion, said Jan Arild Ellingsen, the Progress Party’s spokesman on defense.
“The jury is out on whether the Dingo 2 is the best armored vehicle in Afghanistan of its type,” Ellingsen said. “This seems like a costly temporary solution. We have received honest feedback from our troops in Afghanistan, and the general feeling is that they do not have confidence in this vehicle.” He said the Army’s weapons testing center wrote to the MoD on Oct. 18 advising the government against the purchase of the Dingo 2, Ellingsen said.
The Armed Forces Command, in response, stated that the testing center has changed its position after receiving additional technical data on the Dingo 2 from the FLO and now supports the purchase.
Ellingsen said the MoD should have considered the Oshkosh M-ATV, the armored fighting vehicle designed for U.S. Army use among the prevailing threats and mountainous terrain in Afghanistan.
Faremo said the MoD was informed by U.S. Central Command that the vehicle would not be available to purchase or lease before 2012.
The operational headquarters commander, Maj. Gen. Bernt Brovold, confirmed that the military had been interested in the M-ATV but that U.S. officials said it was not yet available. Brovold said Norwegian forces in Afghanistan needed an armored vehicle quickly, and the Dingo 2’s Vshaped hull and elevated chassis would do the job.
“The Dingo 2 is a maneuverable heavy vehicle with a surprisingly quick acceleration,” he said. “It provides improved protection for our soldiers.” Ellingsen said the “rushing through” of the Dingo 2 purchase represents a knee-jerk response to rising Norwegian casualties in Afghanistan.
AFC figures reveal around 200 separate attacks on Norwegian forces in the first 10 months of 2010. These include around 20 roadside bombs, including a June blast that killed four soldiers traveling in an Iveco light multirole vehicle on patrol in Faryab province.
Nine Norwegian soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since 2004.
“Our soldiers deserve the best armored vehicle protection,” Ellingsen said. “This means using the same vehicles that the Americans do. We should buy or lease. What is very clear is that Army personnel and the military’s weapons testing unit are not convinced by the Dingo 2.” Faremo said such critical comments and assessments were based on general opinions and inaccurate data that failed to take full account of the Dingo 2’s absolute technical qualities and capabilities.
Belgium, which has ordered 220 Dingo 2 units, already deploys the vehicle in Afghanistan. It is also in service with the militaries of Germany, Austria, Luxembourg and the Czech Republic.from the electronic version of DefenseNews.com
Monday, December 06, 2010
A Sheep Dog takes down wolves...
If you don't know what a modern day "Sheep Dog" is then shame on you. This is from the Firearms Blog....
The last stand of Alejo Garza Tamez
Narco-gansters gave 77-year-old Mexican rancher Alejo Garza Tamez an ultimatum, move out in 24 hours or die. Instead of capitulating he heroically made a last stand. NY Post reports ...
He shot so fast and furiously that the confused cartel assumed there were several people inside. Dropping their assault rifles, the thugs lobbed hand grenades into the ranch house until the shooting stopped.The man is a hero and an inspiration. I hope his story is made into a movie.
When the Mexican army finally showed up after the gunfight, they found four dead and two injured gang members piled in a heap outside the shelled, bullet-pocked farmhouse.
Inside, amid a pile of rubble, was the lifeless, bullet-riddled Garza, two weapons at his side.
The unassuming timber businessman was given a hero's burial last week in his native Monterrey, Mexico.
[ Many thanks to the reader who emailed this in ]
Company of the week. Reaction Engines.
Have you ever heard of Reaction Engines LTD? How about the SKYLON project? Neither had I but they're definitely up to something in the UK. I didn't dig deep to see if the British military is interested in their work but with the success of the X-37B, I'm sure BAE or some other conglomerate is taking a close look to determine whether money can be made or not.
Sunday, December 05, 2010
Saturday, December 04, 2010
The Crisis in Korea & Air-Sea Battle.
Just a couple of quick question....
Was the emerging doctrine of Air-Sea Battle (the deterrence portion of the concept) visible in the latest crisis with N. Korea?
If it was I didn't see it.
Let's face it. As a means of deterrence in a rapidly evolving area of concern, only Navy ships with aircraft or Marines aboard are a credible threat...only they have the persistence or the capability to send the proper message while diplomats either de-escalate events or shape the international community for upcoming hostilities.
Did you notice the lack of Theater Entry (or more precisely the need for it if we actually went to war)?
That concept indicates a need to fight your way not to a shoreline but actually into your area of operations.
The last war where that was an actual concern could possibly be WW2 with the Japanese...but even in those actions it was simply blue water warfare with serious island hopping ---the theater was the war...how the they came up with that concept is beyond me...
Two concepts...two strike outs. Actual deterrence comes from fielding technologically advanced, hardened forces capable of conducting the full spectrum of operations. These concepts only seek to cover gaps and make allowances for not funding our military properly.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)