HG S2 (Intel Bot)

Americas BAE Systems won a $72 million deal for the manufacture and delivery of five Columbia-class submarine components. Work will be performed in Louisville, Kentucky (100%), and is expected to be completed by May 2030. Fiscal 2023 National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund funds in the full amount will be obligated at time of award, of which […]View the full article

Do I ever tire of DivThu? Yes, every Thursday I tire of it ... but we've been at it so long, why not? Do I get tired of the topic? Well, sure. Heck, almost 13-years ago I tired of seeing higher education organizations - always claiming poverty - spending millions of dollars a year, especially at the service academies, doing nothing but promoting the division of young men and woman on the basis of race and ethnicity. ...but ... especially in the last few years, there has been a wonderfully blossoming of the understanding of this cancer in higher education that bleeds out in to the general culture. That glimmer of hope and the fact that we seem to be getting traction is, really, why I keep going here. To really start to turn to a 21st Century construct of race relations - something that is becoming more and more needed as we have many more mixed race citizens - we need leaders. Serious leaders with a record of success is the one thing that has been missing. Leaders who understand how to use power and influence to effect change through access to the levers of power. That is how the diversity industry got where they are today, and that is the only way you are going to excise them from their bastions. We now have open advocates in the House of Representatives and the Senate ... but not yet the majority. They are growing in number and influence. What was once only whispered is now openly called out. The Supreme Court - even at its slow pace - is really ahead of everyone in this area, as I believe we will see further proof soon with the upcoming ruling against Harvard and UNC almost a decade in the making. To really take action to the next level towards a better, more unified nation, we need help in the Executive Branch. It won't take much, but it does take vision and courage. What do I mean by "much?" Simple. The best things usually are simple. We just need a leader willing to say, "No." Refusing to let there be any more discrimination and division based in immutable characteristics. To do the right thing; Governor Ron DeSantis can ask Florida public universities for information on their spending on critical race theory and “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” a federal judge ruled recently. ... The requested data includes detailing how the campus programs involve CRT and DEI and the number of employees allocated to them, as previously reported by The Fix. Follow. The. Money. If you didn't already, look at the "13-years" link above. It was millions of dollars at USNA alone then, it has to be much more now. I would offer that those asking for metrics need to be careful, as was shown recently, the diversity industry will try to hide what they are doing. You have to look not just at the full time and part time nomenklatura, you need to look at "targeted recruiting," travel, and hosting expenses for racialist speakers, panels, and affinity group activities. That is where you are going to find the real expenditure of money. You also need to interview faculty under Chatham House rules. From PhD students to professors at civilian and military schools of higher education, I continue to almost daily get reports - most on background not for attribution or sharing - on what is going on. They are in some combination horrified at what is being done, disgusted with what they are participated in, and terrified that they will be seen as not "onboard" with this cult of division. It's a racket - and a counterproductive one at that. Forget the morally reprehensible insistence that people self-segregate based on self-identified sectarian divisions, even ignore preferential treatment or punishment based on same ... no ... just look at the fact that as what Rod Dreher points out, what even the well-meaning are doing is counterproductive; Over the years, social scientists who have conducted careful reviews of the evidence base for diversity trainings have frequently come to discouraging conclusions. Though diversity trainings have been around in one form or another since at least the 1960s, few of them are ever subjected to rigorous evaluation, and those that are mostly appear to have little or no positive long-term effects. The lack of evidence is “disappointing,” wrote Elizabeth Levy Paluck of Princeton and her co-authors in a 2021 Annual Review of Psychology article, “considering the frequency with which calls for diversity training emerge in the wake of widely publicized instances of discriminatory conduct.” Dr. Paluck’s team found just two large experimental studies in the previous decade that attempted to evaluate the effects of diversity trainings and met basic quality benchmarks. Other researchers have been similarly unimpressed. “We have been speaking to employers about this research for more than a decade,” wrote the sociologists Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev in 2018, “with the message that diversity training is likely the most expensive, and least effective, diversity program around.” (To be fair, not all of these critiques apply as sharply to voluntary diversity trainings.) If diversity trainings have no impact whatsoever, that would mean that perhaps billions of dollars are being wasted annually in the United States on these efforts. But there’s a darker possibility: Some diversity initiatives might actually worsen the D.E.I. climates of the organizations that pay for them. That’s partly because any psychological intervention may turn out to do more harm than good. The late psychologist Scott Lilienfeld made this point in an influential 2007 article where he argued that certain interventions — including ones geared at fighting youth substance use, youth delinquency and PTSD — likely fell into that category. In the case of D.E.I., Dr. Dobbin and Dr. Kalev warn that diversity trainings that are mandatory, or that threaten dominant groups’ sense of belonging or make them feel blamed, may elicit negative backlash or exacerbate pre-existing biases. Many popular contemporary D.E.I. approaches meet these criteria. They often seem geared more toward sparking a revolutionary re-understanding of race relations than solving organizations’ specific problems. And they often blame white people — or their culture — for harming people of color. For example, the activist Tema Okun’s work cites concepts like “objectivity” and “worship of the written word” as characteristics of “white supremacy culture.” Robin DiAngelo’s “white fragility” trainings are intentionally designed to make white participants uncomfortable. And microaggression trainings are based on an area of academic literature that claims, without quality evidence, that common utterances like “America is a melting pot” harm the mental health of people of color. Many of these trainings run counter to the views of most Americans — of any color — on race and equality. And they’re generating exactly the sort of backlash that research predicts. If you think the worse of what we are seeing in academia isn't at the US Naval Academy, West Point, USAFA, or USCGA - well then you either have not been a loyal reader of DivThu for the last 18-years or so, or you live in willful disbelief. If you don't think it isn't elbow-deep in to the military ... well ... I'm not sure how far it will take to get you our of your denial. Again, we will have to wait for the right chief executive, but there is no reason the ground cannot be prepared by Congress. If Republican really care to act instead of signal, then there are simple things to do. Like Governor DeSantis has done in Florida, they can effect change at our service academies. They need to ask ... no belay my last ... demand that the service academies answer the same question about funding. Be both broad and very specific on the request and audit the answer you get. Salaries, BA/NMP, collateral duty, travel, speakers, panels, consultants, seminars, affinity groups based on DEI's usually subject areas, all of it. ...and interview, in private, the active duty and civilian instructors who are there. No one said doing the right thing is easy. Make sure and come back next week where we will be reviewing some of the nasty-bits in the "Academic Year 2021-22 Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Report" from the US Naval Academy. Yes, it is about as bad as you think. View the full article

Americas Canada has put off a project to replace its five-decade-old Twin Otter military aircraft used in Arctic operations. The move comes despite the government’s earlier assurance that it is committed to improving its defense capabilities in the north. Instead of procuring new aircraft, Ottawa will extend the service life of its aging Arctic planes. […]View the full article

The whole World Economic Forum/Davos experience is one part Bond villain parody, one part clout seeking billionaires, one part megalomania, a heaping cup of greed, and a dash of rent seeking. In 2023 things have reached the point where any association with Davos should put an individual or organization under notice of suspicion. Amazing to see people who claim to be American conservatives or lovers of liberty attending in an non-ironic, non-protesting capacity. This wannabee gaggle of quasi-oligarchs and autocrat throne sniffers represents everything that is wrong with the human desire for control, power, and to crush the individual for fun and profit. They pretend to be the world government in waiting that no one asked for, no one wants, and trust me on this - no one wants to live under. Being unaccountable to the people is their ideal state. If you don't know what I am referring to above, shame on you. Google it yourself, but I couldn't help but giggle when I read the title from this article by Gideon Rachman at The Financial Times; Geopolitics threatens to destroy the world Davos made. Really? It is? Then by all means let's have MOAR! ...the 2023 WEF — the first to take place in its regular winter location since the pandemic began — could be seen as signalling a return to normalcy. However, China’s sudden abandonment of its zero-Covid policy has raised fears that a new wave of variants could emerge. And, even if a fresh pandemic phase is avoided, Covid has left its mark on the way governments and businesses think about globalisation. The assumption that goods and commodities can always be shipped easily around the world has been shattered. Except for the mentally fragile few and those who leverage power through them, the world is over COVID like it is over the flu. The last three years has been a clarifying event bringing in to stark relief those the autocracy worshipers and hypocrites who hold individual rights in contempt. It also helped us see the existential danger a free people can face when their governments and industries put themselves at the mercy of governments who see a crisis opening a door for an easy grasp at additional powers they will never want to give back. The past the Davos desired failed the future that is our present, but that doesn't give pause to any of them. The Davos view of the future where everyone (except for those at the top) lives in a pod, eats bugs, owns nothing but is "happy" is at best dystopian, at worst justifies at some point if they are not stopped, open global revolt against the ruling class with all the violence and blood that comes with it. As an American, I have no problem saying that. America is a revolutionary nation that twice in its history drenched its soil with blood to ensure the rights of the individual over government and an unaccountable ruling class lording over those they considered lesser humans. We are not at that point in most nations ... but when you see it happen like we saw in Sri Lanka ... understand where it is coming from.Often prompted by governments, businesses are having to change their ways. It is not wise to rely on complex supply chains vulnerable to disease, war or other emergencies. Companies such as Apple — which boasted of products “designed in California, assembled in China” — are having to diversify production. Apple increasingly also produces in India and Vietnam.Notice to complete focus on mercantilist concerns here? No mention or recognition, intentionally, of the maligned influence and moral repugnance of the People's Republic of China? Efforts by some western companies to lessen their dependence on China were prompted by the pandemic, but they have since accelerated because of a heightened awareness of geopolitical risk — otherwise known as war. These are not dumb people. If it took them until the last couple of years to be concerned about war with the PRC ... are they fools or were they just trying to drain as much money out of offshoring to the PRC using slave labor until it was no longer easy to do? I vote the later. Either way, they are not using their intelligence for good. So, yes - bring us to a post-Davos world ... and let anyone who attended WEF before 2019 be giggled at ... and anyone who attends after 2023 - we'll give well meaning people a year to catch up because we're nice like that - on be an anathema to a free people. Nuclear war is the most frightening potential development — and one that has concerned the White House since the outbreak of fighting last February. Even if the use of nuclear weapons is avoided, the danger of widening conflict remains as Nato sends advanced weaponry to Ukraine and Iran supplies Russia with military drones The chance of nuclear war is less now than it was for the first 30 years of my life. The pearl clutching and paper bag huffing about this just encourages the use of nuclear blackmail. I'm sorry - but if you are "frightened" right now, then find another line of work besides national security. This profession requires rational thought, not emotional posturing. Additionally, if we could keep the externalized masochism to a minimum it would be appreciated. The conflict is not expanding because we are helping a nation to defend itself from an imperial war of aggression. When the first Russian tanks crossed the Ukrainian border (again) that is your widened conflict. All else is the inalienable right to self defense.Politicians and industrialists are scanning the horizon for the next big geopolitical threat. Many have focused on Taiwan, which produces 90 per cent of the world’s most advanced semiconductors. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan might shut down TSMC, the most important semiconductor producer, with devastating results for the world economy. Even geopolitical tensions that stop well short of war have disrupted international commerce. The increasingly wary US attitude to China has led the Biden administration to sharply restrict exports of sensitive technology there. This affects not just US companies, but also foreign technology giants, such as South Korea’s Samsung, that use US tech.Again...the Davos mindset. 180 degree lockoff. Taiwan and its semiconductors are not the threat, the PRC is. Note that it isn't the maligned presence of the PRC that is the problem, it is the US response to it. Of course, in line with the mindset above, it isn't the WEF that is the problem, but ..Political leaders, particularly in the west, must worry, too, about domestic pressure from populists. Many of the latter have made the WEF a symbol of inequality and rootless international capitalism.Can anyone tell me where WEF is a supporter of equality and working towards domestic national resilience vice quarterly balance sheets, sketchy bank accounts on small Caribbean islands, or unaccountable power grabs?In recent years, Davos has attracted the ire of anti-vaxxers, climate change sceptics, religious zealots and hardline nationalists. The forum features in a range of conspiracy theories. On the wilder internet fringes, the WEF has been accused of using the pandemic to seize control of the world economy.Oh, nice ... no legitimate concerns, just swivel eyed loons. Don't dare oppose anything going on at Davos, your betters may just call you a name or throw you in the bin with the icky people.Such theories aside, the idea that Davos is faintly toxic has gained ground. President Joe Biden, determined to present himself as fighting for ordinary working Americans, is unlikely to risk an appearance at Davos — unlike Donald Trump, who enjoyed rubbing shoulders with the assembled CEOs. Even centrist and conservative leaders in Europe may be cautious about coming.Good. They should be. Also, will someone put the American (R) there on notice that we see them? President Emmanuel Macron of France, a defender of globalisation who has spoken at Davos in the past, has a sensitive domestic pension reform to push through, so may decide that now is not the right time to attend the WEF. As a new British prime minister, and one with a finance background, Rishi Sunak would normally be expected to seize the opportunity to woo the world’s most powerful chief executives. But the UK faces a wave of strikes, so he too will probably decide that it would be wise to miss Davos this year. Simply unacceptable in democratic nations that the will of the people might promote change in political leadership. Next thing you know, they might want even more free speech and redress of grievances. Those world leaders who are present might do well to take the funicular up to the Schatzalp Hotel, which served as Mann’s model for the sanatorium in The Magic Mountain. The hotel’s view is the best in Davos — it may offer a chance for quiet reflection on how to prevent war and natural disaster from once again engulfing the global economyUnspoofable. Perhaps they should reflect on how they encouraged Russian aggression and European vulnerability to hydrocarbon blackmail? Should they take a moment to see how they look the other way as the PRC engages in wholesale oppression of their Muslim minority? Are they proud of their dividends derived from almost unimaginable levels of air and water pollution flowing out of PRC's slave labor run factories? Unlikely - they might miss out on the next party. A post-Davos world? How do we bring it here faster? h/t Alessio. View the full article

Americas The US Air Force has started phasing out one of its oldest and most reliable assets, the HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopter. This move comes as the Air Force’s 55th RQS (Rescue Squadron) has just returned from a successful deployment, during which the Pave Hawk fleet played a crucial role in a variety of missions, […]View the full article

Whenever I see something about South Korea, their economy or their military, I think of my dad's generation who were of draft age during the Korean War. I've read a bit about the war and the condition of the country and its people when we fought to keep the communist yoke of their neck, and when you look at the South Korea of 2023, it is simply an amazing testimony what free enterprise and education can do to a people held back by autocracy and illiteracy ... with a good bit of rule of law and a benign quasi-imperial military power willing to give them the security to grow. Worth the war? I think so. In the last year, South Korea has impressed many who were not paying attention concerning their growing place as a military-industrial power - specifically their arms exporting and partnership with Poland as she does all she can to be the military power of the Three Seas nations. I keep wondering, do we need to bring South Korea closer in to the Western military infrastructure? Yes, she has a spot of bother to the north that needs almost all her attention and her demographics are far from robust ... but still - is their a collective gain by bringing her closer in? This graph from Zach Cooper really hit home how isolated, in a way, South Korea is outside the bi-lateral relationship it has with the USA. In the abstract to his paper (that I'd love to read in full, but I am sans-access...ahem). As South Korea has aligned its focus to that of the United States, Seoul has expected Washington to integrate South Korea more deeply into American regional strategy. Yet, US efforts to build minilaterals have seldom included South Korea. Addressing this divide will require leaders in both capitals to adjust their approaches to both focus and format in the Indo-Pacific.South Korea has a population of 51.7 million souls, greater than all but six of the 30 NATO nations (USA, TUR, DEU, FRA, GBR, ITA). She has a GDP of 1.8 trillion USD, greater than again all but six of the 30 NATO nations (USA, DEU, GBR, FRA, ITA, CAN). Worth more pondering. View the full article

Americas The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has teamed up with California-based SentinelOne for the Joint Cyber Defense Collaborative to “further support the US government’s strategy to secure the cyber ecosystem and critical infrastructure.” As part of the partnership, the company will provide its autonomous platform to assist in data collection, analysis, and sharing of […]View the full article

It appears that the recruiting and retention challenges are breaking above the ambient noise at the start of 2QFY23. We go through these cycles, but if things seem a bit different to you this time, your instincts are right. The ebb and flow of manning the Navy is a regular story - but there is one major cause that is different this time around and is beyond the control of anyone - it is an almost geographic or structural in nature as will be outlined later in the post. Layered on top of this structural challenge to recruiting and retention are challenges of our own creation and are fully in our control - a headwind of our own creation via decisions and policies that even if changed overnight, their effects will linger for years...and their negative effect will increase with time unless changes are made sooner more than later. Via Diana Stancy Correll at Navy Times; There are about 9,000 operational sea-duty gaps, with the highest gaps appearing in the most sea-intensive ratings... The first thing to came to mind when I read that were the "too clever by half" efforts to "solve" afloat manning that help lead to the horrible summer of 2017. I do believe that we have tried to address this problem of throwing unqualified people just to make the metrics work, but that temptation will always be there. I would really like to see the data over time with that gap number. What has it been for, say, the last 20 years? I know that graph exists...I'd love to see it just so we know how the challenge in in FY23 than it was in FY2013, FY2003, etc. Ships that belong at sea need Sailors, so this multi-causal problem will require more than one effort to fix it. Vice Adm. Roy Kitchener said the Navy is experimenting with a new pilot program aimed at eliminating the number of temporary additional duty, or TEMADD, sailors that are taken from their primary duty stations. Again, this brings more questions than anything else. There is nothing "new" about this problem that would make it a cause of today's difficulties ... unless we have allowed a known problem to get worse. Where are those TEMADD Sailors going? How do FY2023 numbers compare to FY2020? FY2015? If we're talking schools, well good googly moogly, this was a problem when I was a JO. Heck, back in 2011 when I was only 2-yrs post-active duty, in San Diego I asked the senior Lieutenant of a riverine craft doing a static display what was the number one thing he wanted from Navy leadership. His answer was, roughly, "Don't have my Sailors show up only long enough to check in before they are sent off to school to be qualified to do their job. If I'm short an EN1 and Millington tells me, 'You have an EN1 I just sent you.' I tell them, 'Yeah, he checked in last week, will sit here for eight more weeks before going to a six month school. By then my most experienced EN2 is separating. Heck, he goes on terminal leave in two months. That EN1 not only is no good to me, the way he was sent to me only makes my problem worse." We then spent a few minutes saying bad things about Millington before I asked him what his plans were. I'll consolidate and paraphrase roughly. "I'm getting out next year. I'm a Lieutenant in a riverine command. I have no competitive future on active duty." Like I said, not a new problem. So, back to the challenge we're talking about today. As we saw with previous shortfalls, everyone hits the "Easy Button." “The reality is we need to buy more people,” Kitchener said. “And I think right now we’re committed to buying more people; we’re just having a hard time recruiting.” The Navy is offering multiple enlistment and retention bonuses to recruit and keep sailors. For example, future sailors or veterans who re-up right now can combine the maximum enlistment bonus with a maximum student loan repayment to cap out at $115,000 — if they ship out before March. The Navy first introduced the policy last year and kept it for FY23. Well, yes, money helps, but it is only going to get you so far. What is the structural problem I mentioned at the top of the post? 2023 is not 2003 or even 2013. This is the most important graph for understanding our manning problem. Demographics. Demographics is destiny. Always was, always will be. Each year, the a new cohort of children born 18-20 years earlier become the source material to recruit in to the military. Is it easier or harder to get more people from a shrinking pool? Yes, we have that problem - but like our geography and natural resources, the USA has this as a comparative advantage, in a fashion. Compared to other developed nations, our demographics are rather good. Have you seen Korea's? The People's Republic of China? Germany? Russia? As a species, human society has never see such a demographic profile. The developed world and its militaries will have to figure out how work around it. So, yes, the USA and its Navy has a demographic challenge, but so do our friends and competitors ... we just look healthier.Oh, in case demographics and population trees are new to you and you don't really understand how different things have changed for the USA, the below graph is helpful. So much of how we think about manning and retention in our military is based on outdated assumptions about demographics. Look again at the first graph. The USA will have a slightly easier time with a larger cohort of 18-20-year olds in 2028, but then that pool shrinks again, fast. The easiest time to recruit officers and enlisted in the last half century was ... 2011 - and that pool is simply not coming back. Speaking of pools, this should give everyone pause; The Navy met its active duty enlisted recruitment goals for fiscal 2022, but fell short among active duty and reserve officers, as well as reserve enlisted personnel. The service is also prepared for an even more challenging year in recruiting; it drained its Delayed Entry Program pool to the lowest the service has experienced in 40 years to meet its active duty enlisted recruitment benchmarks for FY22. You can only do that once and that trick is done. Over at twitter retired Admiral John Harvey, USN made a solid point on this; https://t.co/59Da39WAHM This is a very big deal - with the DEP depleted to make last year's goal and if recruiting stays way down this year, manning shortages will grow at sea and training pipelines won't be adequately filled. Afraid it's the tip of the iceberg. — John C. Harvey, Jr, ADM USN (Ret) (@JohnHar05137790) January 15, 2023 I see a lot of reacting, pulling from the historical took box and otherwise dealing with symptoms to try to move the needle inside a POM cycle. However, we got here for a variety of reasons years in the making that will not respond quickly to the degree we think they will as described above. Some things, like demographics, we can't do anything about. As we face that shrinking pool we will see again in 2028, there are things we need to act on now to help change perceptions that can linger for years before they change. To make these changes, it will require admissions of error, and that is the problem. Feelings will be hurt. Rice bowls will be turned over. As that those feelings and rice bowls contributed to the problem we have, that shouldn't bother well meaning people. Here they are; Image, Leadership, Reputation: Image: What do our candidates see and hear? In the civilian world, every call is a sales call and every customer is a referral source for new business. In the military, every photograph, event, and gathering in uniform is a recruiting event. We have covered it here in detail previously so no need to point to examples, but who would want to join a service whose ships look uncared for? Whose Sailors are all wearing three or four different uniforms ... brown boots, black boots, camo, blue hat, tan hat ... etc? What messages do rusty ships and disheveled Sailors send to friends and enemies? Why does it seem that so many leaders in our Navy seem to want to dress like they are in the Army or the USMC when they are CONUS or afloat? Are they ashamed of being Sailors? Are they even recognized as being Sailors by potential recruits? Does any of this make the Navy an attractive place to join or stay in - or a place to avoid? Leadership: What are candidates' future bosses saying? When senior leadership is seen and heard from, what are they talking about? Would you want to join an organization whose leadership seems mostly concerned that they employ a bunch of racists, sexists, rapists, and domestic terrorists? Do you want to work for leaders who never seem to defend their people ... who at first chance will defer to the latest slander and promise to "do something about it" when they know there really isn't an "it" but won't support their people by saying so? What about over a decade trying to act as if there were no costs, no down side to making 8, 9, 11-month deployments with a short turnaround as the "new normal?" What about the reality of people spending the balance of their first enlistment in a ship during overhaul because we can plan for the expected? Reputation: What do others think of their Navy a candidate may want to join? One of the worst examples of governmental corruption at scale this century in the United States was/is the "Fat Leonard" scandal. It has been 13-years, almost four times longer than it took to fight WWII, and the primary player, Leonard Francis, has yet to go to trial and even escaped from home arrest earlier this year. On a regular basis, we have IGs investigate someone for an accusation of X, X is never found, but they still dig until they find Y and then destroy a person's decade long service - often draining their personal funds defending themselves in the process. We burn a multi-billion dollar large deck amphib in port, blame it on an undesignated Seaman, drag his name, life, family, and fortune through a court system only to find him not guilty ... all while scrapping the evidence needed to find the cause in the process. The chief uniformed leader, the CNO, invests what little personal and professional capital he has left promoting the toxically divisive racial essentialism of Ibram X. Kendi. This is going on while at the same time parents all across Northern Virginia and the United States are in open rebellion against the public schools in their area for promoting the same Critical Race Theory adjacent racialist practices in their schools. Would those same parents want their kids to join an organization who admits they like having pictures in promotion boards so they can actively discriminate on the basis of race? Really? These all add up. Drip, drip, drip ... the issues with the Navy's image, the defensive crouch and thirsty virtue signaling of its leadership, and the own goals degrading its reputation among the general public - a very different cohort than those the Potomac Flotilla socializes with - has etched a mark on the Navy's attractiveness that cannot be buffed out in a year or two. No, it will take a few years to stabilize the ship and to get it underway on a better course. There are enough challenges out there in recruiting numbers that we need, we need to scrape off the self-applied accretions making the effort even more challenging. It won't come without other costs, but if the goal is to move the needle out of orange and in to yellow, then we need to focus on those things we can control. Start with image, leadership, and reputation. All three have lesser included actions that will come along if you can do these three things better to remove reasons not to join the Navy, and equally important, come off the list for those who want to leave the Navy. View the full article

Americas Bell Boeing won a $23.4 million modification, which exercises options to provide continued flight test support for the V-22 aircraft in support of the Navy, Air Force, and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers. Work will be performed in Patuxent River, Maryland; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Fort Worth, Texas; and Hurlburt Field, Florida, and is expected to […]View the full article

From 12–25 August 1920 there was one of the more important battles of modern history that is relatively unknown out of the country the battle took place in. It is a story of audacity in th eface of incredible odds by a nation only reborn less than two years earlier against an equally younger malignancy. The Battle of Warsaw; The Polish-born and much feared head of the Cheka (Bolshevik secret police), Feliks Dzierzinsky, was made head of a Polish Revolutionary Committee, which would follow the Red Army and form the new government. Lenin was absolutely confident of success. Initially all went well, and within six weeks the Red Army was at the gates of Warsaw. But as the Polish Communists had warned, all classes did indeed unite, and there was no rising in the city. Also the Polish commander, Józef Piłsudski, drew up a bold, if not foolhardy, plan of counterattack. The Polish army would stand on the defensive in front of the city, and when the Red Army was fully committed to the battle, Poland’s best units would launch a flanking attack from the south, cut the Bolshevik lines of communication, and encircle much of the Red Army. Some Polish generals were aghast at the risks involved, but in their desperation there seemed no alternative.As often happens in war, things did not run as per the plan. The enemy has a vote, and they were advancing too fast. The Poles had to move a day early. The Red Army fought its way to the village of Izabelin, only 8 miles (13 km) from the city, but the Polish attack succeeded beyond wildest expectations. Driving through a gap in Bolshevik lines, the Poles advanced rapidly against little opposition. In the Red Army, all was chaos; commanders lost control of their units, with some divisions continuing their advance on Warsaw, others fleeing. Three armies disintegrated, and thousands fled into East Prussia, where they were interned. In an encounter that saw Polish lancers charging and overwhelming Bolshevik cavalrymen, the First Cavalry Army, trapped in the "Zemość Ring," was all but annihilated. The Fourth Army meekly surrendered after being encircled. Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky desperately tried to pull his troops back to a defendable line, but the situation was beyond redemption. A few more engagements followed, but the war was effectively won. Lenin was forced to agree to peace terms that surrendered a large tract of territory whose population was in no way Polish—the Red Army returned to reclaim it in 1939. Losses: Soviet, possibly some 15,000–25,000 killed, 65,000 captured, and some 35,000 interned in Germany; Polish, up to 5,000 dead, 22,000 wounded, and 10,000 missing.The seeds of one victory often hold the next defeat. First posted AUG2018.View the full article

Americas The US Air Force has awarded machine learning-based health developer Sparta Science a small business innovation research deal to identify early signs of sub-concussive brain injury in airmen. Data gathered from the research will assist experts in developing a capability to recognize the impacts of repeated exposures to subconcussive blasts. According to Sparta, results […]View the full article

Unless you have kids of college age like I do, you may not be up to speed with just how far things have gone. Some of you were a little shocked with what we covered back in September about the goings on at the US Naval Academy. They're playing catch up, really. There is a lot worse going on at USNA that I am not at liberty to share (sources and methods, etc) - but trust me, it is getting worse as the faculty and leadership there chase the latest trends at other government and private universities. Shall we check in on what is going on in larger academia? Why, yes, we should. It is coming your way sooner more than later. Here's a little pull quote from an extensive report by John Sailer over at The Free Press, How DEI Is Supplanting Truth as the Mission of American Universities. Many American college students are now required to take DEI, anti-racism, or social justice courses. At Georgetown, all undergraduates must take two Engaging Diversity courses. At Davidson College, the requirement goes under the title of Justice, Equality, and Community, which students can fulfill by taking courses like Racial Capitalism & Reproduction and Queer(ing) Performance. Northern Arizona University recently updated its general education curriculum to require nine credit hours of “diversity perspectives” courses, including a unit on “intersectional identities.” DEI is also becoming a de facto academic discipline. In 2021, Bentley University in Massachusetts created a DEI major. Last year, the Wharton School announced its introduction of a DEI concentration for undergraduates and a DEI major for MBA students. Meantime, the open faculty position listings at universities across the country illustrate how a focus on race, gender, social justice, and critical theory can be crucial to landing a job. Last year, the University of Houston–Downtown sought an instructor in Early Modern British Literature, including Shakespeare, with a preferred specialization in “critical race studies.” At Wake Forest University, an applicant for assistant professor of Spanish should be someone “whose critical perspectives are linked to the experiences of groups historically underrepresented in higher education in ways that inform and influence their pedagogical approach.” Williams College recently sought an assistant professor of German who works “in the areas of migration, race and anti-racism, post- and decolonial approaches, disability, and/or memory studies.” These imperatives often come from the top. In May, the Board of Governors for California Community Colleges (CCC), the largest system of higher education in the country, decreed that every employee—faculty, staff, and administrators—must be evaluated for their “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” competencies. Each district in the system ultimately decides how to enforce the new rule, but the Chancellor’s Office released a list of recommended competencies. It suggested faculty create a curriculum that “promotes a race-conscious and intersectional lens” and advocate for “anti-racist goals and initiatives.” What can be done? Is there anyway to get this nightmare back in the bottle? Well, yes - but while simple, it isn't easy. For decades conservatives retreated from and were pushed out of the institutions. Conservative leaders did nothing. From your local university to the Boy Scouts to Annapolis, those who others who were relied on to hold the line surrendered every hill that they decided was not worth fighting for. Now their enemies hold all the high ground and they are surrounded. Lesson learned here; no longer support that kind of "leader." You know, the kind who accepts the slander against them and their allies in silence, and are more willing to deal with their enemies than they are in supporting their friends. Look for leaders who not only know what time it is, but don't care what names they are called and will take action. You know, like Governor Ron DeSantis of the Free State of Florida; ...DeSantis announced the appointment of six new board members at the small Sarasota college, many of whom were ultra-conservative political players and academics. Sharf, a trans woman, said that she returned to shore—and her phone—to find it had blown up with messages from people telling her the news. “I got really sad and then just, like, laid down,” she told The Daily Beast. Among the appointees on Friday were Charles R. Kesler, a professor and editor for a publication of the far-right Claremont Institute; Mark Bauerlein, a Trump-allied Emory University professor; and Matthew Spalding, a professor at conservative Christian University Hillsdale College in Michigan. “It is our hope that New College of Florida will become Florida’s classical college… more along the lines of a Hillsdale of the South,” DeSantis chief of staff James Uthmeier told the right-wing Daily Caller, laying out their plan. But what immediately caught Sharf’s eye were tweets by incoming board member Christopher Rufo, who only days before had declared that “Gov. DeSantis is going to lay siege to university ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ programs.” In addition to being perhaps the key figure behind the bogus right-wing backlash to mostly nonexistent use of “critical race theory” in schools, Rufo has also been an avid opponent of what he calls “radical gender theory” in education. And among other appeals that form part of his admittedly ruthless political playbook, he has issued callouts on Twitter for “documents, PDFs, audio-video, and training materials related to gender, grooming, and trans ideology in schools.” Yes, I pulled the quote from The Daily Beast, because their tears are precious to me. A better bio of the players can be found here. The Governor's spokesman; In a state full of large public universities, the New College of Florida stands out as an anomaly. With just under 700 students, the liberal arts college is by far the smallest of the 12 institutions that make up the State University System of Florida. Because of its size, NCF has been in the crosshairs of the state Legislature in recent years, with lawmakers arguing that it’s too expensive to operate. A failed 2020 bill would have stripped NCF of its independence and made the college part of Florida State University. DeSantis press secretary Bryan Griffin said by email that New College of Florida “is a public institution with a statutorily stated mission of ‘provid[ing] a quality education.’ Unfortunately, like so many colleges and universities in America, this institution has been completely captured by a political ideology that puts trendy, truth-relative concepts above learning. In particular, New College of Florida has reached a moment of critical mass, wherein low student enrollment and other financial stresses have emerged from its skewed focus and impractical course offerings.” We'll see what happens ... but imagine a Chief Executive actually pushing back against the illiberal left on campus and giving taxpayers and option in education. There is hope - you just need to vote for it. View the full article

Americas Northrop Grumman demonstrated a scaled-down electronic attack system prototype during the US Navy’s Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise last year. The company demonstrated key components of the future Ultra-Lite Electronic Attack (EA) Prototype System aboard a US Navy Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Northrop developed the anti-ship missile defense system for smaller ships that cannot […]View the full article

As I mentioned on Sunday's Midrats, I've been thinking a lot recently about the implications mid-century of this graph; Along with the larger reasons that India and the United States should further grow their relationship for both security reasons and the simple fact we are both republics, reasonable people would think that American diplomatic and other parts of our government would be giving this relationship the attention is clearly needs. Well, you know my opinion of our State Department. Some related thoughts from our friend Cleo Paskal; The United States sends mixed messages to India.On the one hand, Washington highlighted the importance of India’s rise and leadership in its Indo-Pacific Strategy, designated India a Major Defense Partner, and renamed PACOM as INDOPACOM in recognition of India’s important role in the region. On the other hand, in spite of statements about the importance of people-to-people relations, it currently takes years for someone in Delhi to get an appointment for a US visa, India’s efforts to feed and provide power for its people are described as being against the greater good and, well, Pakistan. ... Unfortunately, when it comes to India, State seems to be one of the departments least interested in improving relations. As a result, the first step in improving relations with India would be to ensure that engagement strategy is truly a US strategy and not just a State strategy. That would mean reforming State’s relationship to the rest of the executive branch—having it become more consistently, reliably, even-handed and less selectively integrated in the decision-making disciplines of the executive branch and even in Congressional oversight. As with so many things, it seems that the US State Department is doing as much as it can to not do much to advance American interests abroad. Without civil service reform specifically aimed at State so the ossified blob can be excised and progress made - the nomenklatura will continue to see their job as ensuring they and others have a job ... not to look at where they need to invest their efforts towards advancing the interests of the United States ... often when opportunities are right there being offered to us as it is with India. All we have to do is have people and processes that will do it. We don't seem to quite have it. View the full article

Americas Riverview Construction won a $10.5 million deal to construct a C-130 flight simulator training facility. Bids were solicited via the internet with six received. Work will be performed in Scotia, New York, with an estimated completion date of February 14, 2024. According to Lockheed Martin, the C-130 Hercules primarily performs the tactical portion of […]View the full article

Over at Defense News, Megan Eckstein has your must read to start your week. I hope she does not mind, but I'm going to pull a lot from her article. Read it in full, but there is so much here that validates what we have spent the last two decades on the Front Porch and on Midrats discussing, we need to spend some time to take a deep dive. Back in 2009 we warned everyone that the Navy's decision to classify INSURV was nothing more than a smokescreen to hide the results of bad decisions on maintaining the readiness of our Navy from the taxpayers and allowed senior leadership to play other games as opposed to their core responsibilities. To say that almost two decades after the Cold War all of a sudden INSURV was classified was just, in a word, insulting. In 2009, the U.S. Navy faced a readiness crisis. The cruiser Chosin and destroyer Stout were both deemed unfit for combat operations by the service’s Board of Inspection and Survey, which at the time checked ships’ material conditions every five years. And they weren’t the only ones. From 2005 through 2009, nearly 14% of surface ships failed their inspections, up dramatically from 6.2% from 2000 to 2004 and 3.5% from 1995 to 1999. The crisis came after the Navy discontinued several of its Cold War-era organizations focused on maintenance and training in an effort to save money during a time without a significant threat to U.S. security. No, the "without a significant threat" line is simply BS, an excuse, and for many who knew better ... a lie. We all saw what the People's Republic of China was building. FFS, contemporarily we were a few years in to "The Long Game" series here and we were just riding the wave smarter people set in motion. "Without?" No, that dog just won't hunt. This excuse was designed only to cover people who were focused on little more than building personal clout in their present job, while shifting Navy problems in to someone else's PCS cycle to solve. Sure, there was myopia by an ill-informed or just wrong cohort, but for most it was simply, as we say in horse country, "shooting up the horse." There were some who tried at the time to fix it inside the system, but ultimately came up short. There were good guys, a lot of them - they just didn't get to 50.1%; Adm. John Harvey, who led U.S. Fleet Forces Command at the time, helped charter a fleet review panel to determine how the Navy ended up in this position. ... In 2010, the fleet review panel’s report, dubbed the Balisle Report after lead author retired Vice Adm. Phil Balisle, shocked the surface fleet with its data on the poor state of ship readiness and crew training. It painted a dire picture of a surface navy that needed to be fixed; otherwise, there was a risk someone could get hurt or killed. Let's freeze that for a moment. The summer of 2010. That is 12 and a half years ago. Here is what we wrote about this in June and July of 2010. What is that, between three and four WorldWars length of time? The review, released in 2010, was condemnatory. “The panel is in full agreement that surface force material readiness is in decline. [T]he message is clear: the trend is in the wrong direction.” Chief among the review’s recommendations was a call for the return of readiness squadrons, which oversaw surface ship maintenance and basic training. The review found that when these squadrons were eliminated in 1995, so too was the fleet’s focus on and accountability for making deployable ships and crews. So many of the problems we have today can be traced back to the post-Cold War arrogance of the 1990s, Perry's Last Supper, TQL, the triumph of the accountants, layered with the Transformationalist snake oil of the following decade. In 2010, Harvey pushed to reinstall the readiness squadrons, but he couldn’t rally enough support from the Navy’s manning, engineering and budgeting leaders, among others. The recommendation was never implemented. But in summer 2017, two separate collisions by Navy ships in the Western Pacific killed 17 sailors. The service once again had to dig out of a ship readiness hole, and a key leader again called for the return of the readiness squadrons. Again, the idea went nowhere. The lives of 17 Sailors and two WorldWars after 2010 later. "Nowhere" has one hell of a butcher's bill. “The Balisle Report gave us this tremendous look at a history, really since 2000 or so, of these various decisions that were made in various different parts of the Navy,” Harvey told Defense News. “The collective impact was very, very negative in terms of our ability to keep our ships properly manned, trained and equipped.” ... “Bringing back the readiness squadrons,” Harvey said, “if you talked to Adm. Balisle, it was his No. 1 recommendation to do. And I agreed with that.” Still, Harvey added, the urgency to make this major change was “overcome by other events at that time.” "Other events..." indeed; as we documented at the time linked to above. The U.S. Navy has not made significant progress toward growing its fleet size above 300 ships. The FY23 National Defense Authorization Act allows the service to shed 12 of the 24 ships it proposed retiring. Even with a slower retirement rate and marginally higher shipbuilding and construction funding from Congress, it will prove difficult for the Navy to grow the fleet toward 355 ships. That was the last publicly stated force structure objective, back in 2016; since then, the Navy has not officially stated a revised target. (Source: Doug Berenson/Oliver Wyman)It is a hard sell to beg for more ships when from a material condition to a maintenance support perspective we seem to have trouble taking care of what the taxpayers have already bought us by borrowing money in the name of children yet unborn. Kitchener said there are two key differences this time around: an advanced adversary in China that’s forcing the Navy to think about its near-term readiness to fight; and data analytics and modeling that prove the surface groups will be worth the investment.I'm sorry, but bullsh1t. The threat from the PRC was as well known in 2016 as it is now. I will add to this that no one has confidence on the "analytics and modeling" coming from the Navy. The Age of Transformationalism, gutting of maintenance, and the vaporware that was "optimal manning" have blown all credibility in the Navy's "muh metrics" claims. Kitchener's numbers may very well be perfect, but no one has any reason to believe any of them from Main St. to Congress. Sorry, but institutionally we blew that credibility over the last two decades and it will take a long time to get it back. We would make much better headway by simply saying, "For most of this century we blew it. We were wrong. We are trying to do better." Some, like Harvey, gave the Navy a window to save itself a dozen+ years ago and we didn't take advantage of it. We have years of work to do ... but Step-1 here is to admit our mistakes. Until we do that, everyone can very reasonably assume we will do it again. Data is central to Kitchener’s new effort. He told Defense News in an interview that various efforts have identified the ways to improve ship maintenance: building up a larger inventory of select spare parts, adding capacity in key shops and departments that are potential chokepoints, increasing training and growing expertise in certain technical areas, and more. Ahh...the "Just in Time - -TQL" hangover. What takes one year to destroy, takes five years to rebuild. All that Kitchener is saying is not new. It is, just like readiness squadrons, returning to the last baseline that worked. Are we in the process of a "baseline reset?" That would be a good thing. Take Destroyer Squadron 9, for example, located in Everett, Washington. Its ships are scattered geographically: one located in Everett, five in San Diego and two in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. I'll let you do a distance and time zone review of that for yourself. Norfolk-Mayport was hard enough. There are reasons this exists, but none of them are satisfactory when an overall net cost is considered. Kitchener said he’s awaiting the final recommendations of his working group this summer, but expects each fleet concentration area to have a single surface group responsible for maintaining and training all surface ships, including cruisers, destroyers, littoral combat ships and amphibious warships, based in those cities. These home ports include San Diego; Norfolk, Virginia; Mayport, Florida; Everett; Pearl Harbor; Yokosuka, Japan; Manama, Bahrain; and Rota, Spain. I am trying to hard not to just snark old-school...but really - we have reached the point that giving commanders a chance to "walk the pier" without getting on an aircraft is something "new." Instead of gratuitous snark, have a meme. I mean, this is how it should be ... and seems to be heading back in the correct direction. It should be applauded. Each surface group would devote itself entirely to readiness. ... in the case of a maintenance casualty, the surface group back home would work to find the quickest solution, allowing the destroyer or amphibious squadron staff to continue focusing on operations. “This is oversight and responsibility and accountability throughout the entire” readiness cycle, Kitchener said. “The idea is, this exists in the fleet concentration area, it’s got a cadre of people that are constantly on our ships assessing, understanding what the problems are; we’re pulling the trend analysis here at the headquarters, giving them focus areas. It’s a very active, not just some sort of bureaucratic, organization.”For those who were JOSs in the 90s, I guess a bureaucratic system focused on maintenance excellence is new and radical, but it has a track record. This is simply good stuff. We tried everything else and failed, why not try what worked? Also, can we also make progress in the "Syllabels Reduction Act of 2023?" Can we simply go back to calling things "bases" as opposed to "Fleet Concentration Areas?" 2 syllables and one word > 8 syllabels and three words. As there is a lot of ruin in a nation, there was a lot in institutional capital previous generations built up prior to the 1990s that could be drawn on to pay for bad decisions, but that account is pretty much drawn down to almost nothing. Talk to anyone on The Hill ... it's gone. The Navy has observed improvements in maintenance performance, but is also facing new setbacks as labor and supply chain challenges across the manufacturing sector continue to take a toll on the ship repair industry. Rear Adm. Bill Greene, the fleet maintenance officer for U.S. Fleet Forces Command, said in the fall that only 36% of surface ships are expected to complete maintenance availabilities on time in fiscal 2022, down from 44% in fiscal 2021. ... This duality is also reflected in the most recent Board of Inspection and Survey report, which noted surface ships are seeing higher overall readiness scores than the six-year average, but have more functional areas deemed “degraded” than the six-year average, using a scoring method of satisfactory, degraded or unsatisfactory. Time for a reminder ... we need to make INSURV publicly available again. Less accountability gave us less readiness, and as a result our nation and its Navy is less secure. What vexes the Navy, Kitchener said, is variance in maintenance performance: ... Kitchener outlined a three-step process to address this. The first step was already done under Performance to Plan ... P2P has highlighted the need to prioritize people or materials for a certain ship availability, and then coordinate activities across multiple shops at a shipyard to get a specific repair done on time. The second step is allowing surface groups to devote their full attention to implementing the actions identified through P2P in hopes of achieving better on-time maintenance rates. The third step, on which Kitchener said he’d offer more details soon, is creating a surface response plan that prioritizes certain ships’ readiness over others. If a contingency arose and a combatant commander needed three destroyers, the three ships at the top of the list would be called upon to deploy on short notice. Those ships higher up on the list would be expected to stay in a peak-readiness state, and the maintenance and supply communities would act accordingly. Ships lower on the list and less likely to be called upon for unexpected tasking may be in a lower readiness condition if the fleet is short on personnel or materials, for example. For those outside the Minotaur maze that is the US Navy's decision making, you are allowed to ask, "Why didn't we do this already?" I know. I know. So, what will this look like? Kitchener said the future SURFGRU Southeast, currently named Naval Surface Squadron 14, is the “most robust” organization and has served as a model for the working group, which determined how many supply specialists, logistics personnel, diesel engine (versus gas turbine) experts, and so on, were needed to keep ships properly ready. Kitchener said the Mayport group has 105 billets for a squadron that tends to about 10 destroyers — compared to just 10 personnel tending to nine destroyers and cruisers in Everett. The exact number of billets in each group would depend on the number of ships at a particular port, but Kitchener said the groups would more closely resemble the Mayport squadron than the Everett unit. Mayport ... the best Sea & Anchor Detail in the Navy. The Navy was skipping training and maintenance to achieve unsustainable levels of at-sea presence, and it was down about 12,000 sailors thanks to the individual augmentee program that sent personnel to support joint operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sequestration cuts to the federal budget in 2012 further diminished readiness, Harvey explained. No one said, "No." No one defended our Sailors or our Navy. We let the COCOMs abuse the running room they made for themselves as a result of Goldwater-Nichols and the whole accretions encumbered COCOM structure and Cult of the Joint that came with it. Yes, I am beating that horse and will continue to beat it until we get something fit for the 21st Century. No senior leader was willing to put their "career" - whatever that is after you have 4-stars - on the line to defend their Navy. We needed "Admiral No" and instead got "Admiral Hinge." It wasn't something that happened to our Navy. No, it was something we allowed to happen to our Navy. Heck, during some of the worst of it, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was a USN 4-star. “It was going to take more billets, more people. … And there just was not a clean, widespread agreement among everybody who had to agree that this was the right way to go,” Harvey said. “In the greater scheme of things and what was going on, it just never rose to the level where it had a critical mass of leadership who all said: ‘Yes.’ ” No, plenty of billets were found for other "priorities and distractions" - they were just more important than manning, training, maintaining, and equipping a fleet to fight and win. As I've offered for years, give me the top-cover and the manning documents ashore, and I'll find your billets. Just let me recode and reassign as needed. If I need more, I'll look at afloat and DC staff. They're there - you just have to be ready to upset a different group of people who don't add warfighting value anyway. In the end, this is the cost of distraction and ill-focus; Retired Vice Adm. Rich Brown, who investigated one of the two fatal ship collisions in 2017 and then took command of Naval Surface Forces in 2018, resurrected the push to bring back readiness squadrons. He said that, by 2017, virtually all Balisle’s recommendations were implemented — with the readiness squadrons being the major exception. Brown told Defense News a robust readiness squadron likely would have prevented the fatal collisions involving the destroyers Fitzgerald and John S. McCain. In summary, yep. The existing structure asks destroyer squadrons to oversee the maintenance and certification of ships and serve as the sea combat commander for a carrier strike group. If the squadron needs a ship to fulfill a warfighting requirement, it creates a conflict of interest that can put maintenance and training needs at risk. Brown said this construct “failed, and we recognized that it was failing, and so that’s why the Balisle Report said, and later I said, we’ve got to do this. And we just didn’t do it.” He called the 1980s readiness squadrons “a proven model” that restored the Navy from having a hollow fleet in the 1970s to having a robust surface force by the 1980s. There it is again; baseline reset. A future “high-end fight requires so much dedicated concentration and focus that we need these additional commands. They’re going to come at a cost — it’s going to come at a huge manpower cost, and the Navy’s got to buy that manpower because it’s the right thing to do for our carrier strike groups,” Brown said.Yes, buy manpower ... but also repurpose existing bloat ashore. Yes, recoding BA/NMP is a pain - but it can be done. Yes, rice bowls and rent seekers will be upset. All it needs to be is a senior leadership priority. And at the end of the day, shouldn't the ability to fight and win at sea be number 1? We cannot change the past, but we must acknowledge, name, and recognize past errors so that they won't be repeated. There is some good stuff going on as outlined in Megan's reporting, and we should see more in this direction, but no more happy talk. No more multi-syllabic bullsh1t bingo lingo. No more petty distractions. There are a lot of smart, good people in important positions who want to do great things. They just need the right higher direction and guidance to execute. View the full article

Americas Northrop Grumman won a $15.5 million delivery order for overhaul of power amplifier modules in support of the E-2D aircraft. All work will be completed by September 2025 with no option periods. Work will be performed in Woodland Hills, California; and Liverpool, New York. Annual working capital funds (Navy) in the full amount will […]View the full article

Americas Sauer Construction won a $37.6 million task order to provide construction of two additions to the Trident Training Facility, a Strategic Systems Program missile control center team trainer, and Naval Sea Systems Command weapons handling system team trainer at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia. The contract also contains two unexercised options which, if […]View the full article

When we started Midrats, President Obama hadn't even been President for a year, I only left active duty 4-months ago, Russia was mostly forgotten about except for Secretary of State Clinton famous "Reset/Overload," anyone worried about China was considered an alarmist, and no one really knew what a "podcast" was except for a very small group of to-online weirdos. One day our friend Claude Berube convinced the two of us and the late Raymond Pritchett that people might be interested in hearing us chat about those things that we find interesting. That was 13-years ago - and Midrats is still going strong. Come join us for the full hour Sunday from 5-6pm Eastern as we take a quick review of the status on the conversation in the national security arena, the big lessons of 2022, and what we plan on keeping an eye on in 2023. Join us live if you can, but it not, you can get the show later by subscribing to the podcast. If you use iTunes, you can add Midrats to your podcast list simply by clicking the iTunes button at the main showpage - or you can just click here. You can find us on almost all your most popular podcast aggregators as well. View the full article

Can two men who on one day are doing their best to kill each other also hold each other not just with respect, but to become friends? Most American students of WWII know the name Luftwaffe General-Lieutenant Adolph Galland. Though most Brits know him - for Americans, Royal Air Force Group Captain Douglas Bader may not sound all that familiar. What a remarkable story about the unexpected friendship between two remarkable men. Though you should really watch the whole thing, he was brought on to "This is Your Life" and at the 27-min mark, they brought in his friend Adolph ... which is remarkable when you consider who was brought in before him ... all getting along grandly now. Because we live in an age of miracles and wonders - via YouTube you can watch the entire 1954 movie of Bader; View the full article

Americas The US Air Force disclosed that the F-15EX fired air-to-air missiles from the new weapon stations 1 and 9 for the first time on November 29. An AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile was fired from Station 1 and an AIM-9X from Station 9 over the Eglin Test and Training Complex’s water range by pilots […]View the full article

As a general rule, a right and natural thing is simple. Even a radical change, when that change is the correct and productive thing, it is simple to understand, execute, and explain to other people. Just a few words, just a few moments of instruction. Follow on questions are easy. Words are clear and direct. When you find something is such an ill fit to objective reality and the best course of action that you have to redefine the language, shut off debate, and threaten any mild concern with destruction of reputation and livelihood to any who may have those questions and concerns ... then you need to think real hard if what you are doing is really correct. This week's DivThu is brought to you by Aaron Sibarium over at The Washington Free Beacon. He really did all the hard work for me, so I'll keep the commentary to a minimum. It is a broad article about what the taxpayer funded diversity nomenklatura are doing to operationalize one of President Biden's first Executive Orders. Not law. No, the American people through their elected representatives will have no say in this. No, not a law but it is treated as such - especially in the most compliant branch of the government, the military and military adjacent bits. Once you get something like this set via an EO, no law can easily untangle; Of course, in Year-Zero, all words get new meaning. All concepts are reborn. So, let's see what the Army is doing. Markers. Gender is fluid, you see. There is no such thing as male and female. That is now military policy. All the details are in the link. Ignore the science; embrace the politics. Have you tired of the pronoun wars? Oh, you sweet, sweet summer child; they have only just begun; Ranks are now pronouns, I guess. Whole hog. The military is now fully onboard with all the language and socio-political theory. Sex no longer exists. You are not - regardless of what you eyes or religion may tell you - male or female. Don't disagree or you are a bigot worthy only of NJP; What was once a Monty Python skit is now a ... well ... Once you leave the Army ... it doesn't stop there. Behold the Veterans Administration 175 slide diversity PPT slide-deck from hell!! Oops. This is ... something... I am not sure how anyone in the Army or the VA will be able to do anything but try to comply with what appears to be an attempt to drive people insane, or to the civilian sector. Finally, I guess bullsh1t bingo simply isn't fun anymore. I do encourage you to read it all and keep this in mind; this is not a conversation. This is not a discussion. This is not an education - this is a guide to tell you how you must speak, act, comply, and enforce a very specific socio-political way. As the training outlines - do not comply as the commissars direct, and you are subject to punishment. You are directed to "relax about bathrooms" if a 6'3" 220# 40-yr old man as of yesterday comes in to shower with the ladies today. Then you, an 18-yr old 5'1" 110# female, are not supposed to object either if that biological man then becomes your roommate. No, bigot. And if you are a leader in that organization, be careful that you ... well .. you know what you need to do. Read the slides. Read the room. View the full article

Americas The US Army has awarded Oshkosh Defense a $102-million contract to produce Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTV) for its international allies. The tactical vehicles will be handed over to the armed forces of Romania, Lithuania, North Macedonia, Brazil, and Montenegro to bolster their ground mobility. According to the American defense firm, the contract reflects […]View the full article

Back in the November 2007 issue of The Atlantic, Robert D. Kaplan published an essay that still comes to mind on a regular basis a decade and a half after its publication; America's Elegant Decline. I first mentioned it ten months after its publication while I was in Afghanistan, and then only briefly. At 15, I think it is time to see how it holds up. 15 years is a long time - but it also passes quickly. 15 years from now would be January of 2038. You know all that talk about "2040" in the last year, well you're one POM cycle away ... and while some things we think about the future to come will be roughly correct, some will be quite off. That is normal and should be expected. With that benchmark in place, Elegant Decline holds up pretty well. Before we dive in, let's remember the time and place of 2007. Obama was still the junior Senator from Illinois. The surge in Iraq was almost at its peak and at the time success was iffy. Though we knew at CENTCOM in mid-Summer of 2007 that NATO culminated in Afghanistan and the USA would have to step in soon as we could, in general Afghanistan - the good war - was seen as in good hands with NATO. Though the cheap seats were warning otherwise, the Navy let everyone know of the glories of Transformation embodied by LCS, DDG-1000 and CG(X) were going to bring if everyone would just shut up and color ... a period that would end 18-months after Elegant Decline with the truncating to 3-ships of the Zumwalt class ... and you know the rest as we rolled in to the Age of Salamander to prepare everyone for The Terrible 20s. So, in to that moment Kaplan dedicates the first third of his article reminding everyone of some truths are were as correct in 2007 as they are in 2023; Beware pendulum swings. Before 9/11, not enough U.S. generals believed that the future of war was unconventional and tied to global anarchy. ... Now the Pentagon is consumed by a focus on urban warfare and counterinsurgency; ... But have we pushed it too far? We may finally master the art of counterinsurgency just in time for it to recede in importance. ...Though counterinsurgency will remain a core part of our military doctrine, the Pentagon does not have the luxury of planning for one military future; it must plan for several. "Regular wars" between major states could be as frequent in the 21st century as they were in the 20th. ... these future wars will not require any "manifestation of insanity by political leaders," nor even an "aberration from normal statecraft, " but may come about merely because of what Thucydides recognized as "fear, honour, and interest." .. The current catchphrase is boots on the ground; in the future it could be hulls in the water. ... A "peaceful, gain-loving nation" like the United States "is not far-sighted, and far-sightedness is needed for adequate military preparation, especially in these days," warned Navy Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan in 1890.. This is when he transitions to what he, rightfully, sees as a primary indicator of America's decline - its Navy - something that dominates the other 2/3 of the article. ...too few strategists at the time were thinking seriously about sea power. Today we are similarly obsessed with dirty land wars, and our 300-ship Navy is roughly half the size it was in the mid-1980s. A great navy is like oxygen: You notice it only when it is gone. But the strength of a nation's sea presence, more than any other indicator, has throughout history often been the best barometer of that nation's power and prospects. I just wanted to take a note to nod at the hard work led by Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) in the changes to Section 8062(a) of USC Title 10, 15-years after Elegant Decline, to put this in to law. Our friend Bryan McGrath has a superb summary of the changes and their importance here. Back to Elegant Decline - where Kaplan does a great job outlining more nuggets of unalloyed truths; Our sea power allows us to lose a limited war...Army units can't forward-deploy anywhere in significant numbers without a national debate. Not so the Navy. ... Great navies help preserve international stability. ... In an age where 90 percent of global commerce travels by sea, and 95 percent of our imports and exports from outside North American do the same (even as that trade volume is set to double by 2020), and when 75 percent of the world's population is clustered within 200 miles of the sea, the relative decline of our Navy is a big, dangerous fact to which our elites appear blind. Well, it didn't double, but it did go up by 30%. A lot of you will remember this well; ...in a 1954 article in Proceedings ... a young Harvard academic named Samuel P. Huntington told the Navy not to feel sorry for itself: The resources which a service is able to obtain in a democratic society are a function of the public support of that service. The service has the responsibility to develop this necessary support, and it can only do this if it posses a strategic concept which clearly formulates its relationship to the national security. Emphasis added by me. Good googly moogly yes. Has our "service" been doing this sales job well? No, no it has not. Why? They have tied themselves to the mast of the archaic, accretion covered Cold War era Goldwater-Nichols and the Cult of the Joint that comes with it. That is why. They have convinced themselves that they have to accept this state of affairs in silence when they don't - it is senior leadership's choice to interpret it as such. Our Navy and the nation it serves suffers as a result. ...by 1997, post Cold War budget cuts had reduced the Navy to 365 ships. (In the Quadrennial Defense Review of that year, the Pentagon established a 'red line' of 300 ships, below which the Navy would not go.) LOLOLOLOLOL. Of course the 300-ship Navy could still, in the words of Robert O. Work, ... BOB! ..."pound the snot" out of primitive challengers like Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, Don't worry, they didn't forget about China completely; Robert Work told me that he believes the eventual incorporation of Taiwan into China will have the effect that the Battle of Wounded Knee had on the United States: it will psychologically close an era of national consolidation for the Chinese, thereby dramatically redirecting their military energies outward, beyond their coastal waters. Tellingly, whereas the U. S. Navy pays homage to Mahan by naming buildings after him, the Chinese avidly read him; the Chinese are the Mahanians now.The next bit is something we called at the time wrong-headed and unhelpful and Kaplan is suspicious of at the time as well; then CNO Admiral Mike Mullen, USN (Ret.); He (Mike Mullen) went on: "I'm after that proverbial 1,000-ship Navy - a fleet in being, if you will, comprised of all freedom-loving nations, standing watch over the seas, standing watch over each other." Subtract the platitudes, and it's clear that Admiral Mullen is squaring a number of circles to contend with the difficult reality he's up against. I continue to hold that this throw away line that became a talking point that was then made flesh was one of the greatest strategic errors this century so far. It gave top cover to those who were looking for reasons not to build the Navy our nation needed. The evils of the Age of Transformationalism only made it worse ... another of Mullen's follies; This is what the optimists saw right before the rot was unavoidable anymore; The new DDG-1000 Zumwalt-class destroyer, envisioned in one form or another for 12 years and beset with delays could end up costing $3 billion a ship - if any get built. The new Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers could cost a whopping $8 billion each - not including $6 billion of research-and-development costs. History can be cruel to such a geologic pace; this slowness is a recipe for vulnerability and nasty strategic surprise. We have a capital-intensive Navy consisting of vessels that cost tens of billions of dollars, and that must therefore each deploy for decades if they are to return the investment. Yet all future peer competitor like China need do to greatly devalue our fleet is to improve its ballistic-missile technology to the point where we're forced to move our carriers, say, 100 miles east of their present positions off the Asian mainland, to keep them out of missile range. We should be so lucky. Time has found Kagan an optimist here. ...the new Ford-class carriers will be built with laser guns to kill incoming missiles, anti-torpedo torpedoes to deal with supercavitation technology, and electric catapults for launching UAV's in case fight jets, with their human pilots, give way to enhanced remote-controlled Predators that can be refueled in air. Well, in 2022 lasers are still the weapon of tomorrow like they always seem to be, anti-torpedoes are a strong maybe to no, and unmanned systems are still a few generations away if ever from there ... so ... technology and future risk can suffer from excessive optimism bias ... as always. Watch 2001: A Space Odyssey for a hint in that regard. Meanwhile, as costs drive us towards that 150-ship Navy... Not yet...we're doing better than that so far. Kaplan was a bit too much of a pessimist on this point. At my darkest in pondering The Terrible 20s I warned of 240 back in 2010. According to Navy Lieutenant Commander Claude Berube, who teaches at the U.S. Naval Academy, in an emergency we might even issue letters of marque, the way we did during the Revolutionary War, giving privateers the legal authority to act in our defense. Allowing privateers to help with, say, the drug-interdiction effort in the Caribbean would enable uniformed sailors to concentrate on the Pacific and Indian oceans. Claude! Today, the United States devotes 4.38 percent of its annual gross domestic product to defense. Before the Iraq War, it was 3.5 percent. In 2022 it was back to ~3.5%. Admiral Morgan, the deputy chief of naval operations for information, plans, and strategy, told me that to maintain our naval primacy, we may need to devote close to 5 percent of GDP (assuming a growing economy) to defense. Yet it's unclear whether the American public will abide that.Spoiler alert; they didn't. So, there we go; the Elegant Decline at 15. Much spot on, some a bit too optimistic, some too pessimistic. On balance though, it aged fairly well in a decade and a half. It should keep us all humble and it would do everyone well to understand that, on balance, 2023 is not all that different than 2007 ... and 2037 will most likely not be all that different than 2023. Plan accordingly. View the full article

Americas The US Air Force has received a new E-11A aircraft with a battlefield airborne communications node (BACN) payload at Prince Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia. The plane will be integrated into the air force’s 430th Expeditionary Electronic Communications Squadron, the “Black Wolves,” which supports combat communications. The BACN’s “WiFi in the sky” capability allows the E-11A to function similarly to a low-Earth satellite, maintaining aerial command and control capabilities for airborne and ground units. Colombia has selected the French defense firm Nexter’s Caesar 6×6 self-propelled howitzer for its military, according to Spanish defense news website Infodefensa. The South American nation has reportedly earmarked $101.7 million to purchase an undisclosed number of the artillery platforms, which have become increasingly popular in recent years. The US Department of Defense and Lockheed Martin have finalized a $30 billion deal to deliver up to 398 F-35 Lightning II aircraft. The agreement includes 145 Lot 15s, 127 Lot 16s, and 126 Lot 17s for Finland, Belgium and Poland. “The F-35 delivers unsurpassed capability to our warfighters and operational commanders,” F-35 Joint Program Executive Officer USAF Lt. Gen. Mike Schmidt stated. Middle East & Africa Abu Dhabi Ship Building (ADSB) has announced the start of construction of the United Arab Emirates Navy’s first Falaj 3-class fast patrol vessel (FPV). A steel-cutting ceremony was held recently at an ADSB facility, confirming the completion of the research and design phase for the new vessels. According to the company, the Falaj 3-class FPVs are complex, high-speed warships with state-of-the-art sensors and combat systems. Europe The British Ministry of Defence has donated counter-explosive ordnance equipment to war-torn Ukraine. Last week, the UK delivered more than 1,000 metal detectors to help Ukrainian troops clear land mines and clear civilian infrastructure of explosives. The Polish government has inked a five-year deal with France to purchase two Airbus military observation satellites. With an accuracy of 30 centimeters (nearly 1 foot), the new satellites are expected to bolster the Polish Armed Forces’ reconnaissance capabilities to detect potential military and civilian threats. Asia-Pacific Taiwan is planning to purchase 100 units of the Switchblade, a small, attack-type unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) developed by the American company AeroVironment, and give it to the Army’s special forces. The purchase is expected to take place in 2024 via foreign military sales channel. According to Up Media, Taiwan is taking a close look at such type of suicide drone after noticing its successful in the Ukrainian battlefield. An invitation to bid by the Navy suggest the service is seeking to acquire similar drones. Today’s Video WATCH: 430th EECS receives new E-11A BACN View the full article