30th Anniversary: Invasion of Grenada

Today marks the 30th Anniversary of the Invasion of Grenada

Operation Urgent Fury, was a 1983 United States-led invasion of Grenada, a Caribbean island nation with a population of about 91,000 located 100 miles (160 km) north of Venezuela, that resulted in a U.S. victory within a matter of weeks. Triggered by a bloody military coup which had ousted a four-year revolutionary government, the invasion resulted in a restoration of constitutional government. Media outside the U.S. covered the invasion in a negative outlook despite the OAS request for intervention (on the request of the U.S. government), Soviet and Cuban presence on the island and the presence of American medical students at the True Blue Medical Facility.

There a long and excellent article at Small Wars Journal about How Grenada Changed How America Goes to War.
When you read about the planning leading up to Grenada, you'll be astounded that the US succeeded at all...

In this immediate period, the JCS passed out two parallel planning requests to two separate organizations with only inferred or non-existant guidance to jointly coordinate-Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) and Atlantic Command (LantCom). JSOC because an actual invasion might include the new SOF elements and LantCom because Grenada fell into its geographical area of responsibility. Each began planning in isolation of the other and each planned for forces without regard for the other. In neither organization, until almost the point of execution, was the 82d Airborne or XVIII Airborne Corps engaged or mentioned.

The task each headquarters assumed was the capture of the Point Saline Airfield as well as likely nodes of government. The existence and safety of the students, primarily American citizens, at St Georges Medical University was initially not an issue.

Earlier, in 1979, the democratic government of Grenada was overthrown in a coup and replaced by a socialist dictatorship. On 14 October 1983, an internal power struggle resulted in the death of the original coup leader, Maurice Bishop and his replacement by his chief lieutenant Bernard Coard and his enforcer Gen Hudson Austin, both professed communists. Sir Paul Scoon, the UK Governor General, was placed under house arrest.

Despite this evolution, a US-based expatriate medical school, St Georges Medical University, continued to operate from several campus’s on the main island of Grenada. However, by the October coup, students and faculty became increasingly alarmed about the thuggish nature of local security elements. On 20 October, Hudson Austin announced a curfew for the students and the entire population, brought in additional guards and accused the school of spy activities. Numerous students called their friends and families and indicated their lives were in danger.

At this point, the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States as well as the governments of Barbados and Jamaica asked the US to intervene. Three days later, 23 October, the Marine barracks in Beirut were bombed with a large loss of life. The Joint Chiefs of Staff began intensive planning resulting in an execute order for the invasion of Grenada on 25 October 1983. This would be the first significant military action for the US since its departure from Vietnam in 1973. This order involved a Joint effort by both elements of Lantcom and JSOC together-a requirement not previously expressed. Lantcom would be in overall command-sort of-and include the Marines afloat who were headed to Beirut to relieve the just-bombed barracks elements. Lantcom would also have augmentations from the 82d Airborne Division and follow-on forces from XVIII Airborne Corps. This inclusion was unknown until approximately two weeks prior to execution.

In sum, though two headquarters were charged with essentially the same task, each worked with forces not known to the other and planned in isolation. Further, key elements of the final plan (82d Airborne) were not informed of their engagement until two weeks prior to execution. The chain of command was imprecise and no Joint communications system other than ad hoc was established. The mission to rescue and recover the medical school students was a last minute addition to the 82d task list.

What are your recollections of the invasion and aftermath? And has their ever been a worse earnest 'war' movie than Heartbreak Ridge?

By: Brant

USAction! - Aviation at Sea

U.S. Navy Seaman Kendahl Chmara, left, signals to the USNS Arctic as U.S. Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Matthew Michela gives commands to riggers during a replenishment aboard the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility, Sept 13, 2013. U.S. Navy photo by Seaman Karl Anderson

By: Brant

A Clear Mis-allocation of Available Resources?

Hmmmm... a Gulf II war story from over on CSW

I had my own run-in with the "keep it under the table" forces of darkness... I was assigned as liaison for the amphibious forces at 5th Fleet HQ in Bahrain in the lead-up to the invasion. About a week before the attack there was a huge kerflufle about wanting to get humanitarian relief supplies into southern Iraq as soon as possible after the border was crossed, but in such a way that the MSRs going north out of Kuwait wouldn't be impacted. The obvious solution was to bring them in by sea, but there was concern about the Shatt-al-Arab being mined and the facilities at the port of Basra being damaged (both by Iraqi sabotage and Coalition bombing). A rushed scheme to clear the water way was concocted, but Brown&Root were adamant that it would take them a minimum of four months to restore the port to operational condition. At this point, after consulting with the various commands I was representing, I proposed that we send a large SeaBee detachment from Kuwait (where their mission to offload the USMC pre-positioning ships and construct an elevated causeway to facilitate resupply cargo discharge was complete, so they were basically sitting idle) up to Basra to repair the port. The SeaBees had the expertise, the necessary construction gear and materials, had vehicles to transport themselves to the site, and had the weapons and training to provide their own security -- more importantly, the 0-6 in charge of the battalion was absolutely confident he could have the port open for business within two weeks and fully functional within a month. It sounded like a real win/win scenario to us. But after I floated the idea up the chain, and 5th Fleet gave a provisional green light to the plan, word came back from SecDef (not CENTCOM, not JCS -- SecDef) that the proposal was rejected and we were not to bring it up again. At my Admiral's request I sent an e-mail to the contact back at the five-sided-funny-farm asking what part of our concept they had issue with so we could submit a revised plan. That evening I took a secure phone call from some O-6 staffer with the SecDef's office telling me very coldly and clearly that I was to NEVER bring up the topic again and that if I did I'd be relieved and sent home (with the veiled implication that disiplinary action wouldn't be out of the question). We dutifully dropped the subject.

There's no independent verification of this, so take it for what it's worth, but it's an interesting indictment of how the occupation was run. By: Brant

Secretary of the Navy Announces the Names of Multiple New Ships

The DoD is announcing the Navy's plans for the naming of a group of new ships.

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced today the names of seven ships: three joint high speed vessels (JHSV), the USNS Trenton, the USNS Brunswick and the USNS Carson City; an amphibious transport dock ship (LPD), the USS Portland; two littoral combat ships (LCS), the USS Wichita and the USS Manchester; and an ocean-class auxiliary general oceanographic research (AGOR) ship, the R/V Sally Ride.

“As secretary of the Navy, I have the great privilege of naming ships that will represent America with distinction as part of the fleet for many decades to come,” Mabus said.  “These ships were all named to recognize the hard working people from cities all around our country who have contributed in so many ways to our Navy and Marine Corps team.”

Joint high speed vessels are named for small American cities and counties that embody American values.  The future USNS Trenton (JHSV 5), named in honor of New Jersey’s capital city, will be the fourth ship to bear this name.  Similarly, the USNS Carson City (JHSV 7) is the second naval vessel to be named in honor of Nevada’s capital city.  The USNS Brunswick (JHSV 6) is the fourth naval vessel named for the seaport city in Georgia and recognizes its longstanding relationship with the Navy. 

Military commanders will have the flexibility to use the JHSV in a variety of roles to include supporting overseas contingency operations, conducting humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, supporting special operations forces and supporting emerging joint sea-basing concepts.

The 338 foot-long aluminum catamarans are being constructed at Austal USA in Mobile, Ala., and are designed to transport 600 short tons 1,200 nautical miles at an average speed of 35 knots.  These vessels can operate in shallow-draft ports and waterways, providing U.S. forces added mobility and flexibility.  JHSVs are equipped with an aviation flight deck to support day and night air vehicle launch and recovery operations.  JHSVs have berthing space for up to 104 personnel and airline-style seating for up to 312.

Amphibious transport dock ships are named for major American cities.  Mabus named the future USS Portland (LPD 27) in honor of Oregon’s most highly populated city.  LPD 27 will be the third ship to bear this name.

The principal mission of Portland will be to deploy combat and support elements of Marine expeditionary units and brigades.  With the capability of transporting and debarking air cushion (LCAC) or conventional landing craft and augmented by helicopters or vertical take-off and landing aircraft (MV-22), these ships support amphibious assault, special operations, and expeditionary warfare missions.  The USS Portland will provide improved warfighting capabilities including an advanced command-and-control suite, increased lift capability in vehicle and cargo-carrying capacity and advanced ship survivability features.

Portland will be a San Antonio-class (LPD 17) amphibious transport dock ship, built by Huntington Ingalls Industries in Pascagoula, Miss.  The ship will be 684 feet in length, have an overall beam of 105 feet, a navigational draft of 23 feet, displace about 24,900 tons and capable of embarking a landing force of about 800 Marines.  LPD 27 will be capable of reaching sustained speeds in excess of 22 knots.

Littoral combat ships are named after great American communities. 

The littoral combat ships named for Wichita and Manchester recognize regionally beneficial cities that are also within the top five highly populated communities in their states.  The USS Wichita (LCS 13) is named in honor of Kansas’ largest city and will be the third ship to bear the name.  The USS Manchester (LCS 14) will be the second ship named for one of New Hampshire’s industrial centers.

Wichita and Manchester will be outfitted with reconfigurable payloads, called mission packages, which can be changed out quickly as combat needs demand.  These mission packages are supported by special detachments that will deploy manned and unmanned vehicles and sensors in support of mine, undersea and surface warfare missions.

These ships are designed to defeat growing littoral threats and provide access and dominance in the coastal waters.  A fast, agile surface combatant, the LCS provides the required war fighting capabilities and operational flexibility to execute focused missions close to the shore such as mine warfare, anti-submarine warfare and surface warfare.

Lockheed Martin with Marinette Marine in Marinette, Wis., will build the Freedom-variant, USS Wichita (LCS 13), which will be 388 feet in length, have a waterline beam of 58 feet, displace approximately 3,400 tons, and make speed in excess of 40 knots.  Austal USA in Mobile, Ala., will build the Independence-variant, USS Manchester (LCS 14), which will be 419 feet in length, have a waterline beam of 103 feet, displace approximately 3,100 tons, and make speed in excess of 40 knots.

Mabus named the future R/V Sally Ride (AGOR 28), which will be a Neil Armstrong-class AGOR ship, to honor the memory of Sally Ride, a professor, scientist and an innovator at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego.  Ride was the first woman and also the youngest person in space.  She later served as director of NASA's Office of Exploration.

Traditionally, AGORs are named for nationally recognized leaders in exploration and science.  The R/V Sally Ride is the first academic research ship to be named in honor of a woman.

“Sally Ride’s career was one of firsts and will inspire generations to come,” said Mabus.  “I named R/V Sally Ride to honor a great researcher, but also to encourage generations of students to continue exploring, discovering and reaching for the stars.”

The ship will be a well-equipped modern oceanographic research platform that includes acoustic equipment capable of mapping the deepest parts of the oceans, and modular onboard laboratories providing the flexibility to meet a wide variety of oceanographic research challenges.  These make them capable of supporting a wide range of oceanographic research activities conducted by academic institutions and national laboratories.  The research vessel will be outfitted with multi-drive low-voltage diesel electric propulsion systems.  This upgraded system will help maintain efficiency while lowering maintenance and fuel costs.

The Neil Armstrong-class AGOR ship will be 238 feet in length, have a beam length of 50 feet, and can operate at more than 12 knots.  AGOR 28 will be built by Dakota Creek Industries, Inc. in Anacortes, Wash. 

By: Brant

USAction! Battleships

Battleship Division Two: In line abreast formation, 7 June 1954, in the Virginia Capes operating area, on the only occasion that all four Iowa class battleships were photographed operating together. Ship closest to the camera is Iowa (BB-61). The others are (from near to far):Wisconsin (BB-64); Missouri (BB-63) and New Jersey (BB-62).

h/t Jim W on FaceBook. Text from FaceBook group on Iowa class battleships

By: Brant

$30-odd Billion in Carriers

right-click to save for yourself

By: Brant

Navy Announces New Research Vessel to be Named in Honor of Neil Armstrong

The US Navy is naming a new research vessel in honor of Neil Armstrong.

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced today that the first Armstrong-class Auxiliary General Oceanographic Research (AGOR) ship will be named Neil Armstrong.

Mabus named the future R/V Neil Armstrong (AGOR 27) to honor the memory of Neil Armstrong, best known for being the first man to walk on the moon. Armstrong was an aeronautics pioneer and explorer for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) serving as an engineer, test pilot, astronaut and administrator. Armstrong also served as a naval aviator flying nearly 80 combat missions during the Korean War.

"Neil Armstrong rightly belongs to the ages as the man who first walked on the moon. While he was a true pioneer of space exploration and science, he was also a combat-proven naval aviator," said Mabus. “Naming this class of ships and this vessel after Neil Armstrong honors the memory of an extraordinary individual, but more importantly, it reminds us all to embrace the challenges of exploration and to never stop discovering.”

Armstrong’s widow, Carol, will serve as the ship’s sponsor.

The Armstrong-class AGOR ship will be a modern oceanographic research platform equipped with acoustic equipment capable of mapping the deepest parts of the oceans, and modular on-board laboratories that will provide the flexibility to meet a wide variety of oceanographic research challenges. These make them capable of supporting a wide range of oceanographic research activities conducted by academic institutions and national laboratories. Additionally, the research vessel will be outfitted with multi-drive, low-voltage diesel electric propulsion systems. This upgraded system will maintain engine efficiency while lowering maintenance and fuel costs.

Armstrong-class AGOR ships will be 238 feet in length, have a beam length of 50 feet, and operate at more than 12 knots. AGOR 27 is currently under construction by Dakota Creek Industries, Inc. in Anacortes, Wash.

By: Brant

US Navy to Christen Second Joint High Speed Vessel

The US Navy is going to launch the USS Choctaw County.

The Navy will christen the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) Choctaw County, named for three U.S. counties, located in Mississippi, Alabama and Oklahoma, which share the county’s name, during a ceremony in Mobile, Ala., Sept. 15, at 10 a.m. CDT.

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus will deliver the ceremony’s principal address. Women from Ackerman High School’s class of 1966, 29 in all, will serve as the ship’s sponsors, with Theresa Pitts designated as the lead sponsor for the classmates. Ackerman High School is located in Choctaw County’s town of Ackerman, Miss.

“I chose to name this joint high speed vessel after Choctaw County where core American values of hard work, putting family first, and giving back to your community are on constant display,” said Mabus. “I could think of no better representatives of these values than the women of Ackerman High School’s class of 1966. Each represents the best of the American spirit and our enduring American values. I am honored they accepted the invitation to serve as sponsors for this fine ship.”

The 338 foot-long aluminum catamaran is being constructed by Austal USA in Mobile, Ala. Choctaw County and the eight other JHSVs under contract enable fast, intra-theater transportation of troops, military vehicles, supplies and equipment. Military commanders will have the flexibility to use the JHSV in a variety of roles, including supporting overseas contingency operations, conducting humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, supporting special operations forces and supporting emerging joint sea-basing concepts.

They can transport 600 short tons 1,200 nautical miles at an average speed of 35 knots and can operate in shallow-draft ports and waterways, providing U.S. forces added mobility and flexibility. The JHSVs also have an aviation flight deck to support day and night air vehicle launch and recovery operations. JHSVs have berthing space for up to 146 personnel and airline-style seating for up to 312.

Upon delivery to the U.S. Navy’s Military Sealift Command (MSC), Choctaw County will be designated as a U.S. Naval Ship and will have a core crew of 21 civilian mariners who will operate and navigate the ship. The first four JHSVs, including Choctaw County, will be crewed by federally employed civil service mariners. The remaining six will be crewed by civilian contract mariners working for private shipping companies under contract to MSC. Military mission personnel will embark, as required, by the mission sponsors.

By: Brant

Every Service Has At Least One Bat-Shit Crazy Senior Officer

And apparently the Navy's guy wanted to pick a fight with Iran.

According to Todd and another witness, Cosgriff’s idea, presented in a series of staff meetings, was to sail three “big decks,” as aircraft carriers are known, through the Strait of Hormuz — to put a virtual armada, unannounced, on Iran’s doorstep. No advance notice, even to Saudi Arabia and other gulf allies. Not only that, they said, Cosgriff ordered his staff to keep the State Department in the dark, too.

To Todd, it was like something straight out of “Seven Days in May,” the 1964 political thriller about a right-wing U.S. military coup. A retired senior naval officer familiar with Cosgriff’s thinking said the deployment plan was not intended to be provocative.

But Todd, in an account backed by another Navy official, said the admiral “was very, very clear that we were to tell him if there was any sign that Washington was aware of it and asking questions.”

For the past year, the air had been electric with reports of impending U.S. or Israeli attacks on Iran. If this maneuver were carried out, Todd and others feared, the Iranians would freak out. At the least, they’d cancel a critical diplomatic meeting coming up with U.S. officials. Todd suspected that was Cosgriff’s aim. She and others also speculated that Cosgriff wouldn’t propose such a brazen plan without Fallon’s support.

Retired Adm. David C. Nichols, deputy Centcom commander in 2007, recalled in an interview last year that Fallon “wanted to do a freedom-of-navigation exercise in what Iran calls its territorial waters that we hadn’t done in a long time.” Nothing wrong with that, per se, but the problem was that “we don’t understand Iran’s perception of what we’re doing, and we haven’t understood what they’re doing and why,” Nichols said. “It makes miscalculations possible.”

By: Brant

USS Constitution Sets Sail

Commemorating the 200th anniversary of a victory in the War of 1812, the USS Constitution sets sail under her own power in Boston.

CHARLESTOWN, Mass (Aug. 19, 2012) The world's oldest commissioned warship, USS Constitution, sails under her own power. This is only the second time in 131 years traveling without help. The last time Constitution sailed was 1997. This exercise commemorates the 200th anniversary of the Constitution's victory over the British frigate Guerriere during the War of 1812. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Andrew Meyers/ Released)

By: Brant

USN Collision in Persian Gulf

An oil tanker collided with the USS Porter in the Persian Gulf.

An oil tanker collided with a U.S. Navy ship near the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday but no one was hurt and shipping traffic in the waterway, through which 40 percent of the world's seaborne oil exports pass, was not affected, officials said.
"Both vessels are okay and the Strait of Hormuz is not closed, and business is as usual there," an Oman coast guard official told Reuters, declining to be named under briefing rules.
The Bahrain-based U.S. Fifth Fleet said the Panamanian-flagged, Japanese-owned bulk oil tanker M/V Otowasan collided with the USS Porter, a guided-missile destroyer, in the early hours of Sunday morning.
The navy vessel remained able to operate under its own power after the collision, which was not combat-related, the statement added without elaborating on how the accident happened. An investigation was underway.

By: Brant

Signs of Intelligent Thought Spotted Online!

Two articles out there today (and the accompanying comments) are actually quite thoughtful in their ideas. They are completely unrelated to each other (unless you start trying to draw parallels between them) other than both being intelligent and detailed and worthy of note.

Information Dissemination, a primarily naval blog, has a discussion that starts talking about prepositioning equipment sets, and morphs into The Expeditionary... Army

The US Army reinvented itself for the war in Iraq in 2005, and reinvented itself again in 2009 in Afghanistan - and bought completely new gear both times specific to each conflict. This isn't new, the Army did the same thing in Vietnam and WWII. Relative to the Navy and Air Force, the US Army can be raised and reinvented very quickly when the money for war is provided.

Meanwhile, over at the relatively new Grand Blog Tarkin, a not-so-subtle discussion of The Jedi Way of War has definite analogues to today's military. That said, I personally believe that the battle scenes in the Star Wars movies are chaotic disasters more suitable for Braveheart than Saving Private Ryan because Lucas doesn't know (or care) about military tactics, doctrine, etc, but he knows what he thinks looks 'dramatic' on-screen.

Although the Jedi were renowned diplomats and keepers of the peace, they were not politicians or strategists, and never critically examined the Separatist’s grievances to identify the root causes of the conflict. Without understanding the causes of conflict, they failed to develop a theory of victory. Without this, they merely continued to pursue of the Separatist leaders and the destruction of their army after the first engagement. They failed to reframe from their roles as individual combatants to leaders of an Army for a multitude of reasons explored below.

By: Brant

USN Deploys Minesweepers to Persian Gulf

The US is sending four minesweepers to Fifth Fleet.

Four U.S. minesweepers have arrived in the Gulf to bolster the U.S. Fifth Fleet and ensure the safety of shipping routes, the U.S. Navy said, as an Iranian military chief suggested on Monday that Iran might try to block the Strait of Hormuz to defend its interests.
The four additional mine countermeasures (MCM) ships arrived on Saturday and are scheduled for a seven-month deployment in an area of operations that includes the Gulf, Gulf of Oman, Red Sea and parts of the Indian Ocean.
The area also includes two other critical shipping choke points of the Suez Canal and the Strait of Bab al Mandab between the southern tip of Yemen and Africa.
"MCM ships conduct operations with coalition forces in order to ensure the continued, safe flow of maritime traffic in international waterways," the U.S. Navy said in a statement late on Sunday.

So how do you incorporate minesweepers into a wargame? Tactical? Strategic? An asset in a card-based game or a deliberate counter that must be deployed somewhere?
What success stories have you seen in wargaming a minesweeper operation? (And the stupid Windows game doesn't count)

By: Brant

BUB: AirSea Battle

The Marines have a nice reasonably-concise, if buzzword-heavy, Air-Sea Battle concept summary

The Air-Sea Battle Concept centers on networked, integrated, attack-in-depth to disrupt, destroy and defeat (NIA-D3) A2/AD threats. This approach exploits and improves upon the advantage U.S. forces have across the air, maritime, land, space and cyberspace domains, and is essential to defeat increasingly capable intelligence gathering systems and sophisticated weapons systems used by adversaries employing A2/AD systems. Offensive and defensive tasks in Air-Sea Battle are tightly coordinated in real time by networks able to command and control air and naval forces in a contested environment. The air and naval forces are organized by mission and networked to conduct integrated operations across all domains.

The concept organizes these integrated tasks into three lines of effort, wherein air and naval forces attack-in-depth to disrupt the adversary's intelligence collection and command and control used to employ A2/AD weapons systems; destroy or neutralize A2/AD weapons systems within effective range of U.S. forces; and defeat an adversary's employed weapons to preserve essential U.S. Joint forces and their enablers. Through NIA-D3, air and naval forces achieve integrated effects across multiple domains, using multiple paths to increase the resilience, agility, speed and effectiveness of the force.

Air-Sea Battle is a limited operational concept designed to address an adversary's A2/AD capabilities. It is not a concept aimed at any particular potential adversary, nor a campaign plan designed to accomplish a specific national objective. Instead, it is a concept that will spark innovation and development of the means to support future operations. The Air-Sea Battle Concept identifies the actions needed to defeat A2/AD threats and the materiel and non-materiel solutions required to execute those actions.

AOLDefense asks the important question: "what do you do once you're in the area where access was denied?"

In the budget wars between the services, "hybrid threats" and "AirSea Battle" have become rallying buzzwords of two opposing camps.

On one side, Army leaders talk of hybrid threats, whose blend of guerrilla tactics and high-tech weapons pose the greatest plausible threat on land, now that Soviet-style tank armies are extinct and the nation has largely sworn off large-scale counterinsurgency. On the other, Air Force and Navy leaders speak of AirSea Battle as a way to coordinate their expensive hardware in a high-tech war with regional powers like China or Iran.

[Since there has to be a middle way, of course, there is also the threat posed to ships by land-based missiles, such as those Hamas used against the Israeli ship Hanit in 2006. A Chinese-built missile is believed to have heavily damaged the ship and killed four sailors.]

While the services tend to use these concepts to justify their budgets, one of the fathers of the hybrid war idea, retired Marine Frank Hoffman, tells AOL Defense they are less contradictory than complementary, especially in a potential conflict with Iran.

AirSea Battle and hybrid war theory address two parts of the same strategic problem, Hoffman said: how to project American power around the globe when potential adversaries from militia groups to the Middle Kingdom are developing new tactics and new weaponry to stop us. (The painfully awkward term of art for such an enemy strategy is "anti-access/area denial"). "AirSea Battle is basically the outer half of the problem: how do you get into a region," he said. "The inner half [is] once you get inside a region, how can you operate" in the face of hybrid threats.

In the meantime, others are wondering if AirSea Battle is already obsolete?

But it’s also clear that the United States should develop its own symmetrical and asymmetric strategies to counter such threats. A joint operational concept of AirSea Battle combined with a strong cyber component could damage, deter, and destroy any Chinese A2/AD capabilities and ensure U.S. maritime access. A newly reconstituted “AirSeaCyber” operational concept would give U.S. forces the best chance to defeat Chinese or any other nations’ A2/AD forces now and in the future.

Of course, the present Joint Operational Access Concept does make strong mention of cyber operations. However, an even stronger emphasis on cyber warfare is needed beyond present day convention. In short, AirSea Battle as an operational concept might already be obsolete.

By: Brant

Restationing of Amphibious Group Moved Up

The US Navy is accelerating the restationing of the an amphibious ready group.

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus announced today that the first amphibious ready group (ARG) ship scheduled to shift homeport to Naval Station Mayport, Fla., will arrive in the last quarter of 2013.

The USS New York, the USS Iwo Jima and the USS Fort McHenry, will shift from their current homeport of Norfolk, Va., to Mayport. The USS New York will be the first to change homeport, followed by the USS Iwo Jima and the USS Fort McHenry in 2014.

Mabus originally announced Feb. 28 that the ARG would arrive no later than 2015.

The accelerated timeline ensures continued viability of the Mayport ship repair industrial base and maintains the capabilities of the Jacksonville fleet concentration area, thereby preserving surge capability and reducing risk to fleet resources in the event of natural or man-made contingencies.

“I am very pleased that the Navy is able condense the time horizon for the arrival of the Mayport ARG,” stated Mabus. “The move underscores just how important Jacksonville and Naval Station Mayport are to our national defense, and how committed we are to strategic dispersal on the east coast.”

View Larger Map

By: Brant

US-JPN-SKOR Naval Exercises Announced

Defense.gov News Release: United States, Republic of Korea and Japanese Naval Exercises Announced

The United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan will conduct a two-day, trilateral naval exercise June 21 - 22 in the waters south of the Korean peninsula.

The exercise will focus on improving interoperability and communications with the ROK Navy and the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force, which can facilitate cooperative disaster relief and maritime security activities in the future. The three navies will conduct this exercise beyond the territorial waters of any coastal nation.

The United States will then conduct a routine carrier operation with the ROK Navy in the Yellow Sea immediately after the trilateral exercise June 23 - 25.

The George Washington Carrier Strike Group will make a port call in Busan, South Korea, after completing the two exercises.

Note that there's no mention of either China or the Norks.

By: Brant

Focus on China? Or Just Seeking a Focus?

Is AirSea Battle's focus on China an approach with built-in belligerence? And if not China, what threat out there guides strategic developments of the military?

In spite of this, AirSea Battle and its most recent manifestation, the Joint Operating Access Concept, are controversial. Some critics see it as an attempt by the navy and the air force, after a decade of relative neglect, to grab the lion’s share of a shrinking defence budget—already being trimmed by about $480 billion over the next ten years.

Others fear that although the concept does not mention China by name, it is the only opponent with the range of capabilities the new thinking is designed to counter. (Significantly, the Chinese defence minister did not attend the Shangri-La get-together; see article.) And whereas the 1980s predecessor of AirSea Battle, AirLand Battle, was intended to meet the real threat of a thrust by Soviet forces into Western Europe, the threat from China to America and its regional allies is harder to define. In a speech last month at the Joint Warfighting Conference, General James Cartwright, vice-chairman of the joint chiefs of staff until last year, said of AirSea Battle: “To some, it’s becoming the Holy Grail…[but] it’s neither a doctrine nor a scenario.” Worst of all, said General Cartwright, “AirSea Battle is demonising China. That’s not in anybody’s interest.”

Nathan Freier, of the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies, argues in a recent paper that although conflict with China “might be the most lethal set of circumstances from a traditional military standpoint, it is also the least likely and the most speculative.” North Korea, Pakistan and Iran (with their actual or putative nuclear arsenals) and even Syria all represent more realistic A2/AD challenges, which might well require the insertion of the ground forces that AirSea Battle ignores.

Other critics, such as Noel Williams, an adviser on strategy to the marine corps, point to the risk of escalation—because of the dependence on deep strike against Chinese targets on land—and to the absence of ideas about what happens without ground forces once a strike is made.

By: Brant

BUB: The "Pacific Pivot"

Lots of news these days about the US re-focusing its long-termstrategies toward the Pacific.


The US is refocusing, without trying to piss anyone off.

As the United States moves to bolster its military position in Asia, it faces severe budget cuts from Congress, an increasingly powerful rival in China and a hornet's nest of regional political sensitivities.
The shift in U.S. policy puts Asia and the Pacific front-and-center of its strategic priorities and is driven by concerns that China has raced ahead in the world's most economically dynamic region while the U.S. was tied up fighting its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But in a region rife with disputes and increasingly beholden to China's economic engine, the Pentagon is being careful its "pivot to the Pacific" doesn't create too many waves.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who is spearheading the U.S. effort to sell the new strategy in Asia, told regional defense leaders at a major security conference in Singapore that it is only natural for the Asia-Pacific to be in the spotlight because it is home to some of the world's biggest populations and militaries.
Before moving on to Vietnam and India, Panetta said Washington will "of necessity" rebalance toward the Asia-Pacific region and vowed 60 percent of the Navy's fleet will be deployed to the Pacific by 2020. He said the U.S. presence will be more agile, flexible and high-tech. Troops may increase overall, but no major influx is expected.

And that new strategy includes significant naval investments, including the new DDG-1000 series of ships.

A super-stealthy warship that could underpin the U.S. navy's China strategy will be able to sneak up on coastlines virtually undetected and pound targets with electromagnetic "railguns" right out of a sci-fi movie.
But at more than $3 billion a pop, critics say the new DDG-1000 destroyer sucks away funds that could be better used to bolster a thinly stretched conventional fleet. One outspoken admiral in China has scoffed that all it would take to sink the high-tech American ship is an armada of explosive-laden fishing boats.
With the first of the new ships set to be delivered in 2014, the stealth destroyer is being heavily promoted by the Pentagon as the most advanced destroyer in history — a silver bullet of stealth. It has been called a perfect fit for what Washington now considers the most strategically important region in the world — Asia and the Pacific.

Some of the particulars mentioned in the article are pretty impressive.

The DDG-1000 and other stealth destroyers of the Zumwalt class feature a wave-piercing hull that leaves almost no wake, electric drive propulsion and advanced sonar and missiles. They are longer and heavier than existing destroyers — but will have half the crew because of automated systems and appear to be little more than a small fishing boat on enemy radar.
Down the road, the ship is to be equipped with an electromagnetic railgun, which uses a magnetic field and electric current to fire a projectile at several times the speed of sound.

Even the Canadians are getting into the act, with a Singapore-based logistics hub on the table.

Singapore said it was studying a proposal from Canada to set up a logistics facility in the city-state for disaster relief efforts, reportedly to support a US military shift to Asia.
Canadian Defence Minister Peter Gordon MacKay said in an interview with The Canadian Press that the proposal was part of Ottawa's efforts to back up the US military "pivot" towards the Asia-Pacific region, which has irked China.
"The Canadians have proposed setting up a logistics support hub in Singapore for their regional humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts," a spokesman for the Singapore foreign ministry told AFP on Sunday.

By: Brant

Navy Secretary to Commission Submarine Mississippi Today

The Secretary of the Navy will commission the submarine USS Mississippi.

The Navy’s newest Virginia-class attack submarine Mississippi will be commissioned Saturday, June 2, 2012, during a 10 a.m. CDT ceremony at the Port of Pascagoula in Pascagoula, Miss.

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus will deliver the ceremony’s principal address. Allison Stiller, deputy assistant secretary of the Navy for ship programs, will serve as the ship’s sponsor. In the time-honored Navy tradition she will give the first order to "man our ship and bring her to life!"

The selection of Mississippi as the name for the submarine is dedicated to the state’s long-standing tradition of shipbuilding in support of our nation’s defense. It also honors the indomitable spirit of the people of Mississippi, who have made great strides in recovering from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. This fighting spirit will be an inspiration to all sailors who embark aboard Mississippi.

There have been four previous ships named Mississippi. The first Mississippi, a side wheeler, served as Commodore Matthew Perry’s flagship for his historic voyage to Japan and fought with Admiral Farragut’s forces on the Mississippi River during the Civil War. The second and third were battleships, a BB-23 in World War I and a BB-41 in World War II. The fourth Mississippi, a Virginia-class nuclear guided missile cruiser, was decommissioned in 1997.

Designated SSN 782, the ninth ship of the Virginia class, Mississippi is built to excel in antisubmarine warfare; antiship warfare; strike warfare; special operations; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; irregular warfare; and mine warfare missions. Adept at operating in both the world’s shallow littoral regions and deep waters, Mississippi will directly enable five of the six Navy maritime strategy core capabilities -- sea control, power projection, forward presence, maritime security, and deterrence.

Capt. John McGrath, a native of Neptune, N.J., and a 1990 graduate from the U.S. Naval Academy, will be the ship’s commanding officer, leading a crew of approximately 134 officers and enlisted personnel.

The 7,800-ton Mississippi was built under a teaming arrangement between General Dynamics-Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industry-Newport News Shipbuilding and was delivered to the Navy one year ahead of contract schedule and under cost. Mississippi took just over 62 months to build, which set the record for the Virginia Class Submarine program's fastest delivery.

The boat is 377 feet long, has a 34-foot beam, and will be able to dive to depths of greater than 800 feet and operate at speeds in excess of 25 knots submerged. Mississippi is designed with a nuclear reactor plant that will not require refueling during the planned life of the ship -- reducing lifecycle costs while increasing underway time.

The commissioning will be aired live on the U.S. Navy’s Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/usnavy and Livestream channel http://www.livestream.com/usnavy beginning at 10 a.m. CDT (11 a.m. EDT). Join the conversation on Twitter #NewMiss .

By: Brant

A Bad Idea, Repeated, Is Still a Bad Idea

After MMOWGLI failed to accomplish anything meaningful in examining the issue of HOA piracy, the Navy decided to not accomplish anything meaningful in their quest to explore ending oil dependence.

The Navy is hoping that online game playing will yield new ideas as the service seeks to reduce its exposure to the uncertainties of the global oil market.

The Energy MMOWGLI — short for Massive Multiplayer Online Wargame Leveraging the Internet — calls on players to respond to a range of future scenarios where the Navy’s ability to respond to disasters and security threats is blunted by fuel shortage.

The competition, which runs this week and is open to the public, comes out just as the Navy’s long-term plan for using alternative fuels has been threatened by lawmakers who have criticized its costs.

Earlier this month, House Republicans passed a measure that would bar the Navy from purchasing fuels that cost more than conventional fuels. The biofuels currently being purchased by the Navy for its jets, ships and vehicles cost four to five times the price of fossil fuels.

Within the game, players are open to consider biofuels and any other options that take both consumption and efficiency into account. Players watch videos briefing them on the scenario and then propose ideas in 140 typed characters that advance a small-scale strategy.

Because there's great & deep wisdom in gamers with 140-character limits. (Sigh)
MMOWGLI got over-run with uselessness because they over-valued the repetitive contributor, instead to trying to figure out a way to value the valuable contributor. Doesn't look like they've made any improvements.

By: Brant