HG S2 (Intel Bot)

From almost day-one of the LCS saga, the turrets-like response to any criticism to the capabilities of this sub-optimal platform has been, “Swarm attack, swarm attack, swarm attack, boobies, pee pee†– or something like that. When the never-was-has-been that was NLOS was deleted from the PPT, about the only reasonable thing that could fill the literal gaping holes was the Griffin missile. After all, we all know in hushed tones the limitations of sensor to shooter of the single … yes single .. 57-mm “main†gun and they had to get something. An OK something now is always better than a perfect thing that may never arrive. The key is to know you just have an OK and act accordingly. Thank goodness that we have the 30-mm and .50-cal onboard, as that really is the best response against swarms as it stands going in to 2013. We also know that history tells us that when actually faced with such attacks, like the Royal Navy did in San Carlos Water (but from the air), you will have Sailors with small arms shooting as well – all the while cursing that you are on a ship that, simply, does not have enough easily added medium caliber general purpose guns. Every war starts with ships getting additional small/medium caliber weapons added; so it will be with the next. But … let’s move on to the Griffin. Something is better than nothing, but we need to be clear that Griffin is simply not the answer. It is useful, but as sub-optimal for its needed purpose as LCS is. From a well known expert in weaponeering, I got the nod to share his thoughts and observations on Griffin. The balance of the below is a paraphrase with a few modifications and additions from his email. Assuming that Griffin is the Navy's answer to swarming tactics, there's a drawback. Griffin uses semi-active laser homing. That means the target has to remain painted by the laser so that the Griffin's seeker can home on the reflected laser light (visible or invisible to the human eye). Meanwhile, what about multiple bogeys? Unless you have multiple laser designators for the other bogeys, a swarming attack can overwhelm this kind of system. That's what the Iranians and others are training to do. Weather also affects laser targeting. Water droplets in the air (low cloud, rain, fog, mist) or smoke particles will scatter the laser beam to the point the missile cannot identify its target (unless it has some kind of "home on last good fix"). Those who have had to fly in the Arabian/Persian Gulf know what a nightmare the atmospherics can be in that place. The problem with the "last good fix" is the target is moving so it will be gone when the missile gets there. What is needed is a missile that has its own guidance system that's fire and forget once target lock is established. Once you get "tone", fire and switch to a new target. The Israeli Spike MR or ER is a fire and forget type of missile that's perfect for swarming attacks. Comparing Griffin to Spike, the better missile is the Israeli Spike MR or ER. The Spike guidance uses both imaging infrared and charge coupled device sensors for guidance. Countermeasures that work against lasers don't work against this kind of guidance. The above is the Executive Summary of the sub-optimal missile we play on putting on our sub-optimal platform. More work needed, and LCS are still in production ... and will be filled with Sailors who will be put in harm's way. We need to do the best we can with what we have. Still ... in many ways the LCS drama kind of reminds me of .... View the full article

If you worry what kind of impact the money trouble in DC may have on the condition of the ships we are riding hard and leaving up wet, I invite you to spend some time with RDML Joe Carnevale, USN (Ret), Senior Defense Advisor for the Shipbuilders Council of America, presentation from 5 December 2012. I recommend slide 31 if you are in a hurry. View the full article

... I raise you a deployment. Via Reuters; The Indian navy is prepared to deploy vessels to the South China Sea to protect India's oil interests there, the navy chief said on Monday amid growing international fears over the potential for naval clashes in the disputed region. India has sparred diplomatically with China in the past over its gas and oil exploration block off the coast of Vietnam. China claims virtually the entire mineral-rich South China Sea and has stepped up its military presence there. Other nations such as Vietnam, Philippines and Malaysia have competing claims. Indian state-run explorer Oil and Natural Gas Corp (ONGC) has a stake in a gas field in the Nam Con Son basin, off Vietnam's south coast. Indian Navy Chief Admiral D.K Joshi said while India was not a claimant in the dispute over territorial rights in the South China Sea, it was prepared to act, if necessary, to protect its maritime and economic interests in the region. "When the requirement is there, for example, in situations where our country's interests are involved, for example ONGC ... we will be required to go there and we are prepared for that," Joshi told View the full article

While many here have spent a fair bit of time poo-poo'n the Chinese's first baby steps in to carrier aviation, I think the engineer-heavy USN mind has largely missed the point - there is a lot more going on here. It looks like the Chinese get it. They get the symbology, the images, the significance of the milestone. They know there is a lot more to do - but they are not focused on the right-now. While we have spent a lot of time and money diminishing our national capital - from "Global Force For Good" to appologizing for our power, to begging for a 1,000-ship volunteer international navy to do our bidding (har, har, snark), to intentionally keeping our CVN away from Libya so our allies could play top-dog while they empied their shallow bunkers - the Chinese continue to build, and message. The Chinese people get it. Think about it. Here's what I mean. Via The Atlantic - guess what this guy is doing besides post-modern cat-blogging? Yep, he is a P-3 guy on a disassociated sea tour ... no wait ... no ... he is just the cheeky part of what has become an organic Chinese meme. A meme of ... They get it. Good for China, and I am glad to see that they are enjoying something that they should be proud of. Anyone have any NIMITZ memes we can counter this with? Hat tip PK. View the full article

It has finally happened. We finally have news confirmation from Xinhua and also have pictures of J-15's first take/off and landing from Xinhua. The news of first landing came a couple of days ago, but this is the first time we have seen the photos. Here is a timeline of China's naval flanker program just to give you an idea: 2001, Assemble the T-10K-3 prototype that PLAN purchased from Ukraine. Use this for long term technical study. January 2007, AVIC1 and PLAN’s major program (J-15) research work started. July 2007, AVIC1 SAC had a large program tackling meeting January 2008, blueprint work finished, start prototype research & production stage August 31st 2009, J15-0001 had maiden flight May 6th 2010, maiden take-off flight from the simulated jet-ski at CFTE. Continued production of single digit number of prototypes for future testing August 10th, 2011, China’s first aircraft carrier went out for sea trials. J-15-0005/CFTE-554 and J15-0008/CFTE-556 prototypes made numerous fly-overs, low altitude touch and go landing along the way. July 2012, Finished certification test flights, given permission to product single digit number of batch 0 J-15s for initial testing/trials works September 25th, 2012, PLAN first aircraft carrier was named Liaoning and had its first sailing after commissioning in October November 3rd, 2012, J-15S-0001 had maiden flight Early November, 2012, Liaoning had second sailing after commissioning November 20th, 2012, a PLANAF pilot made the first carrier landing trial. November 23rd, 2012, Two PLANAF pilots flying 2 J-15s finished carrier op controlled first official takeoff and landing trials. This marks successful completion of first stage of the Carrier aviation project. View the full article

Perhaps it is because I spent a lot of time as a JO playing around with the how, when, and to what degree we would nuke someone that nuclear weapons can sometimes be a cold subject. Especially at the tactical nuke level - it isn't the end of the world. Indeed, we trained to fight and win in a nuclear environment not that long ago. Along those lines, I think more people should get comfortable with Alex Wellerstein's NUKEMAP. From Davie Crocket to the Tsar Bomb - play dial-a-yield all you want. Want to know what a probably terrorist nuke of NYC would look like? Without pondering fallout .... build your own ... even your hometown if you wish. View the full article

In this superpower, now on the wane. I guess "lady parts", class warfare, welfare, racial identity, and incompetent foreign policy are compelling to the "undecided" and the "moderates", and to far too many sheeple. . The fate of our Nation was determined by the state that gives us the Cleveland Browns and the Cincinnati Bengals. To quote a friend of mine from my Twitter feed: FreedomOfChoice lost. Rugged Individualism lost. What used to be "what made America great" lost. Isn't it funny...NOW is the time to find common ground? The last four years were about being told "common ground" was succumbing to Progressivism. /Rant Time to kit up, ruck up, and get back into the fight. Catharsis... View the full article

Over at Foreign Policy, John Arquilla - the professor and chairof the defense analysis department at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School - writes about Game Theory with regards to the state of our Navy and recent overly-confident statements by our own President. Instead of using complex algorithms, Professor Arquilla uses games we all know - Battleship and Stratego - to demonstrate the lack of strategic understanding at the highest levels of the Obama Administration. ...In the finalcandidates' debate last week, President Obama delivered a telling, somewhatsnarky zinger in response to Governor Romney's call for naval expansion: "Thisisn't ‘Battleship.'" He then went on to school Romney about how having someaircraft carriers and submarines means we don't need more ships. The governorhad no adequate reply. But the fact ofthe matter is that the old "Battleship" board game -- not the more recent movieflop that was somehow based on it -- offers exactly the right metaphor todescribe strategic affairs in the information age. "Battleship" does so bycapturing the distilled essence of naval operations today: the hider/finderdynamic... Read the whole piece here. View the full article

From a little side-bar I was having with our buddy Galrahn - we wandered in the Royal Navy's VERY retro sounding Joint Concept Note 1/12: Future 'Black Swan' Class Sloop-of-War: A Group System. OK, the only retro use is "Sloop-of-War" - which I fully support. It ain't a corvette ... and it is almost more like the exceptionally poorly named LCS. Read the whole thing - but without picking it apart all over the place - right or wrong I like some of the intellectual work behind it. The Brits have done some good, modest, and reasonable intellectual ponderings; "122. The UK needs affordable solutions to deliver a balanced fleet. It requires the agility to adjust to an uncertain future where it is not known precisely, who, where and when, it will be required to fight. It only knows that history has shown that it will be required to fight. Defence, therefore, needs an intellectual and physical agility that is able to deliver this fleet, fit for task. If not, the Navy risks slipping into terminal decline unable to protect the UK’s vital interests." ... "206. Evolution Rather than Revolution in Maritime Affairs. As the Royal Navy is always in contact, its response to technological change has always demanded an evolution, rather than revolution, in maritime affairs. As one of the major tasks of the Royal Navy is ‘to exert power and influence in support of national political objectives with the aim to prevent conflict by deterring, coercing, stabilising and reassuring others in time of crisis’, the audience needs to believe in that power. It is this interpretation that prevents conflict. A maritime power, such as the UK, would not wish to risk a revolutionary change in its means of applying that power being misinterpreted as a marked reduction in its warfighting capability and/or credibility. Therefore, any change not only needs to deliver improved capability but also requires a clear articulation of its credibility in order to support the primary objective of maritime power: to prevent conflict." OK, the concept has some typical RN issues (like undergunning) - but I like the intellectual nature of their paper. Worth your time. View the full article

DDG 1000's composite deckhouse was revealed this week down in Gulfport. The uniquely angled 48.8m long, by 21.3m wide, by 19.8m high balsa-wood core carbon fiber super-structure is designed to provide the Navy's newest guided-missile destroyer a low radar and infrared signature. The deckhouse, combined with a low-profile tumblehome hull will likely achieve this goal, but is it truly fair to say that this design is "stealthy?" Today's enemies will not operate long range maritime patrol aircraft and radar satellites like the Soviet Union did to locate U.S. fleets on the open ocean 30 years ago. They will, however, use a network of tattletale fishing dhows equipped with satellite phones, cheap tactical UAVs, and HUMINT networks in nearby logistics ports with twitter accounts and smart phones to find ships operating in narrow seas such as the Arabian Gulf. A singulary-unique profile 14,000 ton combatant is not likely to be able to hide from these intelligence platforms, no matter how innovative her design may be. One hopes that the three staggeringly expensive DDG-1000 destroyers will validate many new naval technologies, but how to hide a ship in the littorals during 21st Century irregular warfare will not likely be one of them. Ingalls Photo of the Week: Ingalls shipbuilders at the Gulfport Composite Center of Excellence watch as the DDG 1000 deckhouse begins its journey from the factory to the barge that will deliver it to Maine. Photo by Steve Blount. The opinions and views expressed in this post are those of the author alone and are presented in his personal capacity. They do not necessarily represent the views of U.S. Department of Defense, the US Navy, or any other agency. View the full article

Democrats from the House Appropriations Committee published their estimates of the consequences of sequestration not just on defense, but as DID recently half-jokingly predicted, with an increasingly broad scope and dire consequences. If the loss of 1 million 2 million jobs did not adequately frighten you, consider that the sequester also means “3 million fewer malaria treatments” and “more than 14,000 deaths from completely preventable illnesses.” Forgive our cynicism but either the consequences attributed to the Budget Control Act (BCA) are way inflated for fear mongering purposes, or Congress was unfathomably irresponsible to pass the BCA in the first place. The Congressional Research Service published an overview [PDF] of the various job loss scenarios built around sequestration. Neither they nor us saw the “think of the African children” angle coming though. Sequestration is a bad mechanism that would have adverse effects because of its hamfisted nature. That should provide enough impetus to steer Congress into action, rather than constant predictions of impending doom followed by apathy. The US Defense Acquisition University updated its Defense Acquisition Guidebook to reflect recent regulatory changes including evolutions in the Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) process, affordability requirements, and the role of the Analysis of Alternatives (AoA). THE US Army War College’s SSI argues in favor [PDF] of maintaining American troops in Europe, if only to sustain interoperability with other NATO members. Vietnam ordered 2 more battleships from local shipbuilders, following a first delivery back in January. Vietnam’s naval modernization so far relied on Russian restocking. Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) found Apple’s new smartphone mapping application too accurate for their taste, with its high resolution pictures of an early radar system yet to even be put online. After a similar piece from the Center for Public Integrity published by NBC News in July, CNN takes its turn presenting the remanufacturing of M1 Abrams tanks as a politically-motivated, lobbyist-protected job program. Video below: (more…) View the full article

Professor Bruce Fleming has some observations and thoughts over at The Chronicle of Higher Education; Should we keep the academies? Maybe there's a place for them, if we can eliminate their worst flaws. The academies attract a certain type of student: hard-charging, military-oriented, with expectations of both physical and mental challenges. But the academies squander that rich resource. If we want to preserve the academies, and can accept the fact that they don't produce better officers than the cheaper routes of ROTC and Officer Candidate School, it should be possible to find a serviceable hull of a military educational institution under all the barnacles. American exceptionalism, or failure to adapt? View the full article

The following review by Elise Cooper is an exclusive for BlackFive readers. You can read all of our book reviews by clicking here or on the Books category: Dale Brown’s latest book, Tiger’s Claw , proves once again that he is able to bring to life a thrilling and dramatic story that could be in the headlines in the near future. Currently China is in a position to challenge America militarily, economically, and politically. After reading Tiger’s Claw people might understand how the Chinese-American rivalry will play out. The plot starts out with a powerful China and a US weakened by an economic downfall. After China launches its first successful test of its anti-ship ballistic missile the US President, Kenneth Phoenix, fears the America will lose its naval supremacy. Because America is recovering from a massive recession and has no funds to compete with China’s advancing technology the President enlists the support of retired US Air Force Lt General Patrick McLanahan. His idea is to have the US refurbish old but potent long-range bombers that will be able to push back against Chinese aggression. After being given the green light he leads a force to challenge the Chinese threat head-on. Dale Brown told BlackFive that he wanted to alert his readers by creating a doomsday scenario, especially since sequestration appears to be going forward. Sequestration is the trillion-dollar budget cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act, passed by Congress last year. As of January 1st, 2013, half of those cuts must come from defense, $500 million over a period of ten years. Brown stated, “I decided to paint a picture where China gets strong enough, rich enough, and bold enough to enforce their historical claims of the South China Sea.†This book is about outsourcing America’s defense to private contractors. Since Brown was a USAF navigator in the B-52G Stratofortress bomber and a radar navigator in the FB-111A supersonic bomber he definitely knows about how long-range bombers work. He uses his past knowledge to show the need for long-range bombers because of China’s distance and their 100 million soldiers. In one of his past books, Plan of Attack , he created an American Holocaust, having Russia wipe out two-thirds of America’s nuclear capability, leaving only submarine cruise missiles. His books previous to Tiger’s Claw are about a militarized space, but because of the real-life budget cuts Brown had to create a universe that “adapted to the real world. Thus, I came up with a story about outsourcing American fighters. I got the idea from viewing the Boneyard at the Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. B-1 bombers were just sitting out there. I had the idea to dust off these airplanes and re-build them with modern systems capable of flying long range.†As with all his books the military hardware and technology have been the main characters to support the plot. He told BlackFive, “The characters live to support the gadgets. After twenty-five years of doing this I decided that character development must be secondary to the plot.†Tiger’s Claw is a very insightful and interesting book. Readers will be able to gain an understanding on where the next danger could be for America’s military. It has an interesting and fast paced plot that is very realistic. View the full article

Gateway Pundit has the letters and the scoop. Go check it out - apparently, Al Sharpton read Obama's original letter at the funeral for Heavy D. Over at IBD, an editorial that focuses on the issue: ...'I don't take these folks too seriously," President Obama recently told the Virginian-Pilot, referring to a group of former SEALs who formed the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund Inc., to run ads attacking the leaking of details of the Osama bin Laden raid and other national secrets to further his reelection chances. Apparently the president doesn't take the sacrifice of Navy SEALs who've fallen in battle and the grief of their surviving families too seriously, judging from the form letter sent out to the families of 17 who were among 30 U.S. service members killed when a CH-47 Chinook helicopter transporting them crashed in Wardak province, Afghanistan, on Aug. 6, 2011... View the full article

NASA Photo Very late on the night of 20 July 1969 in a small home in the Appalachians, I watched as a figure moved down a ladder, and into history. On that night, mankind became a true spacefaring spieces as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin set foot on the alien world that is our moon. To be honest, I don't really remember his exact words. Neil maintained that he said "one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind" and I will not dispute him on that. I also remember that our hosts, who were in many ways the grandparents I never had, remembered the night both for his step and for the fact that it was the latest they had ever stayed up in their lives. It was a night of firsts, a night for which people shared televisions with those who had them not, or were not able to get to one at that amazing time. At that age, it really didn't register to me that Neil Armstrong was a Naval Aviator (Lt. JG) or that he had flown combat in Korea. I never new until years after about his plane being hit on a mission, and that he kept it in the air but then lost a few feet of wing to a pole (some say he hit an anti-aircraft chain) because of how low he pulled it out. He kept it in the air despite that, and finally ejected only when it could be done safely over water -- even if winds blew him back to land where a friend with a jeep picked him up. What is out there about him comes almost exclusively from others, complete with contradictions. Then again, that's not surprising as he was in many ways a quiet and modest man. Someone who much preferred teaching to the telling of tales. Someone who worked hard to build the next generation of explorers, aviators, and engineers. Today, he has taken that final giant step that awaits us all. Godspeed Neil Armstrong. LW View the full article

One of the SEALs from the bin Laden raid has apparently written a book about the operation. He uses a pseudonym, but I know his name and it will likely come out shortly. The bottom line is that doing this makes you a douche of epic proportions. There was whining about how former operators were pointing out that leaks about classified ops were hurting our security. They were called unprofessional, which was unfair. They were not giving out info, they were saying that the giving out of info was a dangerous thing This jackass is going to basically spill the details of the raid so he can cash in. Dear Loser, Enjoy the money, you are now dead to all the rest of us. Cordially, Everyone else from the Special Ops community View the full article

http://www.navyhistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/potomacfever-205x300.jpgBy J. William Middendorf II, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, MD (2011), 213 pages. Reviewed by Captain Roger F. Jones, USN (Ret) J. William Middendorf II was an undergraduate at Harvard when World War II began; he soon signed up for the Navy V-12 program and then shifted to NROTC (which took him to Holy Cross). He received his degree – and commission – and was called to active duty in mid-l945, as the war was winding down. A year later, after a scary voyage on an LCS from Shanghai to San Francisco, Middendorf was mustered out, completed his Harvard education, and then embarked on a long and remarkable career in the worlds of finance, politics, government service, and even music. He is also an excellent author: this book is well-written, informative, entertaining, and modest, an admirable exception to the all-too-typical dull and self-serving autobiography. Middendorf has written an earlier book (2006) about the Barry Goldwater 1964 campaign for the US presidency. This event was a life-changing experience, and he has reprised many of the highlights and lowlights in the current book. Middendorf and his friends believed that the Republican Party needed to break free of the northeastern liberal wing, represented by Nelson Rockefeller, and saw Goldwater as the best conservative choice. They pulled off a huge upset at the convention and Goldwater was nominated as the Republican candidate for president. However, Goldwater proved an inept campaigner and lost badly. In the course of this experience, Middendorf contracted “Potomac Fever” – a desire for public service at the national level – and became treasurer of the National Republican Party, while he continued to work in Wall Street finance. Four years later, when Nixon won the presidency, Middendorf was asked if he was interested in serving in the federal government. His first choice, Secretary of the Navy, had been already promised to John Chafee, but his second choice was available – Ambassador to The Netherlands. Middendorf clearly relished this assignment and applied himself to his duties with enthusiasm, especially in the area of promoting international trade. He also found the opportunity to study musical composition; a particular high note was his Holland Symphony, dedicated to Queen Juliana’s 25th anniversary as the Dutch monarch, and recorded by Phillips. In addition to his symphonic compositions, Middendorf wrote a number of marches, and learned to conduct. Nixon won reelection in 1972 and Middendorf could have stayed on in The Netherlands, but he and his family wanted to return to the United States. He was then offered the position of Assistant Secretary of the Navy, with the promise of getting what he really wanted – Secretary of the Navy – if it should become vacant. He was sworn in on August 3, 1973, and eight months later, he was promoted to “SecNav,” his dream come true. In his new job, Middendorf fully understood that he was not running the Navy, but supporting it. Together with CNO Admiral James Holloway and Marine Corps Commandant General Louis Wilson he worked on Congress to fund replacement of Navy and Marine Corps equipment, much of which dated from WW II and was reaching the end of service life. Middendorf knew the drill – the way to persuade members of Congress to vote for anything is to involve their constituents, and he made as many public appearances around the country as he could. Nixon and Vice President Agnew soon left the scene in disgrace, followed by Gerald Ford as President and Nelson Rockefeller as Vice President; both were enthusiastic supporters of the Navy (and Middendorf). Middendorf also had to deal with crusty Admiral Hyman Rickover, a Congressional favorite, who strongly favored making every major surface ship (and every submarine, of course) nuclear powered. While such a program would greatly reduce maintenance and downtime, such a philosophy would hugely increase shipbuilding costs and thereby sharply reduce the number built within budget constraints. Middendorf persevered and managed to introduce several new classes of ships – only some were nuclear powered! – in sufficient numbers to maintain the Navy’s edge over the Soviet Union during the Cold War. This also included establishing a base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, without which President H. W. Bush would have been unable to undertake Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm in 1990. Following the election of Carter as president in 1976, Middendorf went back to banking. When Reagan became president in 1980, he was asked to serve on the CIA transition team and then as ambassador to the Organization of American States. This was a lively time – the Communist takeovers in Nicaragua and El Salvador, the invasion of Grenada, and the Falklands War. After Reagan’s reelection, Middendorf became ambassador to the European Community. There’s much, much more in the book, and anyone interested in national and international politics will enjoy every word of it. Captain Jones was named a 2011 Naval Historical Foundation Volunteer of the Year for his frequent contributions to Naval History Book Reviews. http://www.navyhistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/buy1._V192207739_1.gif The post Blog first appeared on Naval Historical Foundation. View the full article

Wait. What?! This video (flying around today) of Democrat Senator Jeanne Shaheen is unbelievable...: Wonder how the SEAL Team chiefs and officers feel about that one... Jonn Lilyea says that this is evidence of the Dems swiftboating the SEALs. Heh. View the full article

Here is a title that isn't shocking to anyone on the front porch; U.S. Navy Officials Suppressed Bad LCS-1 Test Results Mike Faybey's article at AviationLeak is worth a full read, so is POGO's say about it. Nothing really shocking in some respects, especially the testing information - but what is more interesting is what this tells us about the culture. There are two things that I think are the most important in the article. They are things that perhaps the general public does not fully get a grasp of, and sadly those inside the lifelines know so well that they are an accepted part of the atmosphere. First, like we discussed with Chris Cavas on Midrats last Sunday - we hurt our credibility on The Hill a lot last decade that we are only now starting to get back - and this does not help at all. “I am disturbed by the Navy’s selective disclosure about what is going on in this program,†U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said after Aviation Week shared text of the emails with her staff. “If these had been good results, they would’ve hurried to the Hill to ring out the good news. Congress has the responsibility and obligation to be as knowledgeable as possible about the ships we purchase for our military forces. Most importantly, we must know whether these multibillion dollar programs will meet the operational needs and safety requirements for our troops.†... “These emails seem to indicate test results were manipulated to hide the true level of risk in the LCS program,†she says. “This raises disturbing questions about the integrity of the information Congress received, and whether we are being given the information we need to be good custodians of taxpayer dollars. Congress must stop relying upon the Navy and Navsea to reassure us that these problems are being adequately addressed and should instead get an independent assessment of this program and its management.†Others have questioned the timing of the Navy proposal. “Did the timing of the Navy’s proposal provide Congress with enough time to adequately assess the relative merits of the downselect strategy and the dual-award strategy?†the Congressional Research Service (CRS) asks. Second, we continue to suffer not only the cancer of happy-talk, but the ongoing suppression of anything that is not the best case scenario; anything that does not sound the most positive note. As a result, we no longer act like we are a customer of the military-industrial complex, but part of it - their apologists. U.S. Navy emails and other documents suggest that officials muzzled bad test results for the first Littoral Combat Ship (LCS-1) variant, the USS Freedom, at a crucial time in the program’s development, when the service was considering which seaframe to pick for the $30 billion-plus fleet. Top program officers for the ship and at Naval Sea Systems Command (Navsea) told subordinates to avoid certain language in the test-result reports because of concerns over the downselect decision, the documents show. One naval officer said in an email he would delete the offensive wording of the report. ... Cmdr. James Garner, the Freedom’s commanding officer, told Cmdr. Matt Weber, the ship’s executive officer: “Good brief. Thanks for putting this together. I had a healthy conversation with Dan Brintzinghoffer today and he asked that we not use terms directional instability or the like in any briefings or discussions. The bottom line is concern with respect to the down select, but the definition of the term is also in question. I removed that in the brief but kept the bullets that discuss what we observed.†... In late 2010, when the service was pushing for the dual-block buy, one Navsea official noted in an email that a tight leash was being kept on the trial test results from the fall, saying, “The bottom line is that they didn’t like what the results said.†In other emails, Navy officials said they were told not to brief the test results, including one warning that Navy officials were apparently concerned about possible shipbuilder lawsuits. Aviation Week sources familiar with Navy shipboard operations say it is not uncommon for service officers to tailor reports to make ships and shipboard programs appear in the best possible light. There is an understanding that officers up and down the ranks do not want bad reports, which could put a stain on their own careers. But what is uncommon, those sources say, is such a frank and harsh report as this one on the LCS-1. Censored reports are also uncommon, they say, but this is only because such negative reports are rare in the first place. What have these habits brought us in the last 10-years or so? Ponder that. View the full article

This chills my bones. 10:45AM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT meet with Secretary of State Clinton Oval Office Closed Press 12:30PM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT meet for lunch Private Dining Room Closed Press Obama has shown repeatedly that you are onlyas useful to him as you are useful to him. Biden is not helping and is certainly hurting whim, just by being Crazy Uncle Joe. Romney just trumped him w/ the Prince of Veeps. O can one up him w/ the Queen of Veeps. A XX chromosome play will certainly change the dynamics and it is really all Obama has left. His record is an embarrassment, his message is "Romney is bad Mmmmkay" and there is nothing left to change that in the last 90 days. But throw Hillary in the mix and all bets are off. It stops being a battle of ideas and a true choice about how to save our country from the inevitable fiscal disaster and becomes one more chance for mindless pod people to feel good about themselves by checking a block. First Black President and the First Female Vice President, aren't we progressive? I think I am going to throw up. View the full article

Ummmm ... errrr .... DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY Boston Dynamics, Inc., Waltham, Mass., is being awarded a $10,882,438 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract. The contractor will develop and build a set of identical humanoid robot systems for use by performers in both phases of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Robotics Challenge Program. This effort will develop robotic platforms consisting of two legs, a torso, on board computing, two arms with hands, and a sensor head. The robots to be delivered to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency will be distributed to the top software development teams based on the results of the Virtual Disaster Challenge of the Robotics Challenge program. The contractor will also provide in-the-field support and as-required maintenance to the delivered systems. Work will be performed in Waltham, Mass. Work is expected to be completed by Aug. 9, 2014. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is the contracting activity (HR0011-12-C-0106). Hat tip HB. View the full article

The latest lament of the lames in the Lamestream Media is that somehow, upon further inspection, Vice Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan doesn't have enough Private Sector experience for the job of Vice President. For one thing, Ryan has no significant private-sector experience. Besides summer jobs working at McDonald’s or at his family’s construction company, or waiting tables as a young Washington staffer, Ryan has none of the business-world experience Romney frequently touts as essential for governing. The New Yorker, and specifically, Ryan Lizza, might want to take a moment to let the irony of saying something as galactically ridiculous as that sink in. I mean, in light of the fabulously lengthy resume of the current Occupant of the Oval Office. You know, for the sake of comparison with Candidate Paul Ryan. This could possibly be why I see ads for subscriptions for The New Yorker placed in the same time slots as products from RonCo. So Ryan, let me help you and others at The New Yorker with why this kind of experience is important and next week, we will move on to why being able to balance a checkbook is great experience when working with government budgets. I know I don't have to explain this to very many that read this blog (except maybe Mr. Sparkle), but two things to remember that get you further ahead in life, whether you are a in the military or in the private sector (say, for example, while working a summer job at McDonald's or at your Dad's construction company) is: It Pays To Be A Winner. (If unclear ask any Navy SEAL or Special Forces Soldier what this means) Hard Work is Rewarded. (Same thing with this one) Now, let's have a look at those jobs of Candidate Ryan's. I bet Candidate Ryan figured out while working in construction not to borrow yourself into oblivion on behalf of the client when building something. I bet he learned how to use resources wisely, plan logistics and some other not readily apparent skills like being able to understand what working in the hot sun for low wages was like and then seeing someone named FICA take a bunch of his hard earned money. I bet he learned a little something about regulations, rules, codes and about doing a job right the first time. I bet when he waited tables he learned that hard work and good service are more often than not, rewarded in the form of tips, which the taxman wants to come and get his cut from. I bet he learned to work a cash register, which combined with some checkbook balancing, makes him fit to operate the US treasury. And based on what I have seen from the current President and Vice President, this is more than 300 times the private sector experience than both of them have, and the cabinet, and most of the politically appointed posts within the administration. But Ryan’s Washington experience is also light, at least for a potential President—which, after all, is the main job description of a Vice-President. Ryan has worked as a think-tank staffer and Congressman, but he’s never been in charge of a large organization, and he has little experience with foreign policy. Good! I think the good Congressman has just the right amount of experience in order to understand the Beltway and also to maybe make a few changes along the way. Think Tank Staffer? Sounds like he knows how to think about problems and arrive at solutions. And Ryan, if you ever did at least one embed with US Forces in Afghanistan or Iraq, you would see that your average Fire Team Leader in any Infantry company has more practical experience with foreign policy and diplomacy than anyone in the Obumbler's Cabinet. So Ryan, if you happen to read this, just know that most people that are paying attention are guffawing uncontrollably at the fact that this is what passes for journalism education in America. I hope you didn't go anywhere expensive; I think you wasted your money. View the full article

I am a little thrilled right now. I didn't think Romney was going to make the bold move, but he did and now we can have the battle for this country that we need. Paul Ryan is the right man to articulate the right case that Obama and the left have put this country on the wrong path. Romeny is a solid competent executive with a proven track record of making big things work. Ryan is a bright, young energetic guy who can argue the difficult issues in a positve and upbeat way. That is a combination tat can devastate Barack the incompetent and Biden the batshit. The VP debate should be called off now using the mercy rule. I am about to donate to a political campaign for the first time in my life. This one matters, and now I believe we have America's Comeback Team. View the full article

Latest updates: Major article update. S-80 cutaway, labeled (click to view full) The CIM-2000 Scorpene class diesel-electric attack submarine partnership marked an important step for Spain’s Navantia, as it joined with France’s DCNS to enter the global submarine market. Scorpene is an advanced SSK design, and can be upgraded to AIM-2000 configuration by adding MESMA Air-Independent Propulsion (AIP) systems alongside their diesel-electric drives. Now Navantia is building on that base of expertise, to field its own S-80 Class for the Spanish Armada. Spain’s new submarines will be larger boats with AIP systems as standard gear, as well as other important modifications. This article will cover the S-80 submarines’ capabilities and associated key events and contracts – including sub-contracts to American, British, and Italian firms. S-80 Submarines: Program & Schedule [updated] The S-80 Submarines [updated] S-80 Industrial Partners [updated] [*]S-80 Contracts & Key Events [updated] [*]S-80 Stats [*]Additional Readings & Sources (more…) View the full article

PACIFIC OCEAN (July 27, 2012) The aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68) and the amphibious assault ship USS Essex (LHD 2) are underway in close formation during the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2012 exercise. Twenty-two nations, more than 40 ships and submarines, more than 200 aircraft and 25,000 personnel are participating in the biennial RIMPAC exercise from June 29 to Aug. 3, in and around the Hawaiian Islands. The world's largest international maritime exercise, RIMPAC provides a unique training opportunity that helps participants foster and sustain the cooperative relationships that are critical to ensuring the safety of sea lanes and security on the world's oceans. RIMPAC 2012 is the 23rd exercise in the series that began in 1971. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Raul Moreno Jr./Released) Section 346 of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act directed the Defense Department to commission an independent assessment of U.S. force posture in Asia. This task was assigned to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who has delivered a very excellent report that will be discussed in the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness at 2:00pm on Wednesday, August 1, 2012. I had never heard of David Berteau before this report, he just never popped up on my radar, but he's in my A+ list because this guy is a serious professional, and the report reflects exactly that. In my opinion, the U.S. Force Posture Strategy in the Asia Pacific Region: An Independent Assessment by CSIS is exactly the kind of high bar quality we should expect from the Defense Think Tank community. CSIS has delivered quality taxpayer funded work, and should be proud of their effort. So enjoy the report, and see also this unclassified response from Secretary Panetta regarding the report. I do believe many in this audience will appreciate the high quality work delivered in this report on a very relevant topic. Below are only a few (of the many) thoughts inspired by my reading of this report. I encourage the community to contribute your own analysis and commentary in the comments. Engage the Army Did you read the Army prepositioning article in the New York Times I linked to Monday. What I did not mention in that topic is that the article actually describes a change from the existing APS Strategy 2015, although surprisingly nobody in the comments apparently picked that up, and Army folks simply argued as if APS Strategy 2015 was still the plan. APS Strategy 2015 called for 9 prepositioning ships, but the Army didn't fund 9 ships, and while not fully funding all 9 ships the Army also decided to use that afloat space as the storage facility for MRAPS rather than as a traditional prepositioning squadron. From what I am seeing, all appearances are the US Army is simply checking boxes specific to MRAP storage and prepositioning rather than taking the prepositioning of Army assets forward in the Pacific seriously. I don't think many caught on to the changes that have been made to APS Strategy 2015, and I think folks believed this prepositioning squadron reported in the New York Times was exactly the same as traditional Army prepositioning squadrons, even though it is clearly something different. This approach to Army prepositioning, using it as afloat MRAP storage and reducing the size of prepositioning altogether in the Pacific appears to be counter to the recommendations on page 91 of the CSIS report. Indeed I found it noteworthy that most of the recommendations on page 91 that are recommendations intended to better align the engagement strategy of PACOM with the DOD are specific to what the US Army needs to be doing. I'm a simple Navy nerd, but if I was an Army nerd, I would note that all data points suggest there is a huge vacuum of critically thinking about how the US Army has capabilities specifically relevant to the Pacific theater just waiting for some smart guy to start talking about with new ideas. If you think you're that guy, perhaps you need to be writing those ideas here on ID, because we welcome new ideas and unconventional thinking specific to the Pacific theater from smart Army folks. Dumb Army folks can go apply at Blackfive (just kidding!). On Growing the High End In option three, which is the option that increases the force posture in the Pacific, the report suggests a CSG in Perth and an ARG in Hawaii. Why did the authors not recommend a CSG in Hawaii and an ARG in Perth? The authors made clear in the report that basing a nuclear powered aircraft carrier in Australia was a huge political hurdle, and they also noted the enormous associated costs. So why the recommendation if it's almost certainly a no-go politically? From a political and financial perspective the CSG in Hawaii and ARG in Perth would appear to be the more politically viable approach, and if the ARG was centered around an America class LHA, would that not work as a nice middle ground approach? I find the 4 MAGTF argument in the report a very compelling discussion for forward basing a second ARG in the region, although with the neverending DoD pivot towards the Middle East rather than Asia, Perth makes more sense for that ARG to me than Hawaii does. On Decreasing Posture One of the things I try to do is question assumptions, and sometimes I do it even when I don't necessarily believe the assumptions are wrong. I found it curious that according to the CSIS report there is nothing whatsoever to be gained except affordability in the decreased posture option 4. I'm not sure I believe that a decrease in force posture in the Pacific can have only negative impacts to everything but cost, and decrease in force posture is inherently negative to US policy. It seems to me that what option 4 reveals is that the report is written with an opening assumption that decreasing force posture in the Pacific is inherently a bad thing for US policy. That assumption bothers me because it presumes a lack of resiliency and trust in the capabilities of our allies without us there to hold their hand. I'm sorry, but I've had the pleasure to get to know and understand the capabilities of folks from Australia, South Korea, and Japan - three of the primary places in the Pacific US forces are being forward based under the current Pacific posture policy; and in my opinion CSIS has overvalued our handholding and undervalued the abilities of our allies. I am curious, upon reflection and feedback, if the authors have reconsidered their conclusions in option 4, even if only in parts, and considered the possibility of any (at all) benefits whatsoever in decreases in force posture, even if they are selective and specific about what those decreases are. In my opinion, CSIS did not give the same intellectual rigor to option 4 that they appeared to give the rest of the study, because I find it very hard to believe the US could not reduce the military footprint in the Pacific in any way without only having negative impacts. View the full article