US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Armytimes said:

Senate approves Dempsey to lead Joint Chiefs

New JCS vice chair, Army chief of staff, and Chief of Naval Operations also approved
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Aug 2, 2011 19:52:10 EDT

The Senate cleared the decks of thousands of pending military nominations on Tuesday, including confirming Army Gen. Martin Dempsey to become the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Raymond Odierno to become Army chief of staff and Navy Adm. Jonathan Greenert to be the Chief of Naval Operations.

The list of confirmations approved Aug. 2 includes Navy Adm. James Winnefeld Jr. becoming the JCS vice chairman; Air Force Gen. William Fraser III to be the U.S. Transportation Command commander; and Army Lt. Gen. Charles Jacoby to receive a fourth star and becoming head of the U.S. Northern Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command.

The approvals came as the Senate was poised to leave until after Labor Day.

In addition to filling the senior posts, the Senate also confirmed 2,698 routine promotions for Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps officers and approved the nominations for two assistant defense secretaries. Madelyn Creedon was confirmed to be assistant defense secretary for global strategic affairs posts and Alan Estevez was confirmed to be assistant defense secretary for logistics and materiel readiness.

The nominations were approved by voice vote and with no discussion, and put in place one of the single-largest changes in decades in military leadership that began with Leon Panetta replacing Robert Gates as defense secretary on July 1.

Dempsey, who will succeed Navy Adm. Mike Mullen as the military’s top uniformed officer, has been the Army chief of staff only since April, but was picked for the post when President Obama decided to pass over Marine Gen. James “Hoss” Cartwright, the current JCS vice chairman, as Mullen’s replacement.

Click to expand...

deal could cut defense spending by $900 billion

By Tom Vanden Brook - USA Today
Posted : Tuesday Aug 2, 2011 7:53:29 EDT

WASHINGTON — Cuts to defense spending in the debt reduction bill could total nearly $1 trillion over 10 years — more than double what President Obama had proposed earlier this year — and sap American military might worldwide, say analysts and members of Congress.
Related reading

Debt deal in line with DoD budget expectations (Aug. 1)

Budget cutters may have to consider slashing costly defense systems like the U.S. military’s replacement fighter jet or increase health-care premiums for working-age military retirees to comply with a debt reduction deal that may cut as much as $900 billion from the U.S. military over 10 years.

“They could do this responsibly,” said Todd Harrison, a budget expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “The reality is that it will be very difficult.”

Thomas Donnelly, a military analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, said the Pentagon cuts won’t require “long knives so much as chain saws.”

Harrison estimates the reductions in defense spending could rise to $900 billion over 10 years.

The proposed cuts would force critical weapons systems to be trimmed or eliminated along with reductions in military personnel and training while at war, Donnelly said.

“The question will be what do we do when we get a shock to our system like 9/11?” Donnelly said. “The fact is we haven’t turned down wars, not even President Obama.”

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., has argued that there is “excessive” military spending that can be eliminated in part by scaling back U.S. commitments overseas. But even Obama’s choice for chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, told the Senate last week that $800 billion in defense cuts “would be extraordinarily difficult and very high risk,” prompting some on Capitol Hill to withhold support for the debt-ceiling deal.

Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., chairman of a House Armed Services Committee on military readiness, voted against the bill and described the cuts to the military services as “staggering.” He said the deal would require the Army and Marine Corps to shed needed troops “in a world that’s not getting any safer.”

Among the areas likely to attract budget cutters attention:

• Retirees pay $230 a person or $460 a family each year, along with small co-payments for various types of care. The fees have not gone up since 1995.

• The Joint Strike Fighter, or F-35, is to replace an aging fleet of Harrier jets and protect troops in infantry assaults. The cost: $385 billion for 2,457 jets.

• The size of the ground forces. Army has about 550,000 soldiers, up about 40,000 since 2006. There are about 200,000 Marines, up from 175,000. The Pentagon already has planned to cut 27,000 soldiers and 20,000 Marines by 2015 to save about $6 billion in 2015 and 2016.

If the cuts are targeted, Harrison said, the Pentagon could be forced to make tough choices but still maintain a potent force.

“This will really forces (the military) to rethink its strategy,” Harrison said. “That’s not always a bad thing.”

Last week, in a Congressional hearing on military readiness, the No. 2 officers of the armed services said the services could absorb $400 billion in cuts that President Obama had proposed prior to the debt deal cuts. Anything more would be a problem.

“If they would exceed $400 billion, we would start to have to make some fundamental changes in the capability of the Marine Corps,” said Gen. Joseph Dunford, assistant commandant.

Click to expand...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

By Deb Riechmann and Lolita C. Baldor - The Associated Press
Posted : Monday Aug 8, 2011 17:52:42 EDT

KABUL, Afghanistan — The loss of dozens of elite American troops to a Taliban rocket-propelled grenade is a window on the war to come — focused increasingly on the type of special operations the troops were pursuing when their helicopter crashed.

The U.S. military released new details Monday about the crash in the Tangi Valley, a dangerous area of Wardak province on the doorstep of the Afghan capital. The 30 U.S. troops, seven Afghan commandos and an Afghan interpreter who died were taking part in one of thousands of nighttime operations being conducted annually across the nation.

The sheer number of these missions is evidence that progress in the nearly decade-long war depends more on efforts to kill or capture insurgents than the overarching strategy of building support for the Afghan government at grassroots levels. And these missions will take on relatively more importance as troop levels decline.
Related stories

Some troops killed in helo crash identified

Remains of Chinook crash victims return Tuesday (Aug. 8)

Pentagon: Crash tragic, but not a trend (Aug. 8)

Probe continues at Chinook crash site (Aug. 8)

Obama, commanders discuss Chinook crash (Aug. 8)

NATO: Troops in crash were after Taliban leader (Aug. 7)

NATO, Afghan forces fight insurgents near crash (Aug. 7)

NSW source: Crash ‘worst day in our history’ (Aug. 6)

Afghanistan helo crash kills 30 U.S. troops (Aug. 6)

Obama, Panetta, Mullen mourn helo-crash deaths (Aug. 6)

Saturday’s crash of the CH-47 Chinook helicopter was deadliest single loss for U.S. forces in the war and raised anew questions in the United States about why U.S. troops are still fighting the unpopular conflict.

U.S. leaders vowed on Monday not to let the loss rewrite the war strategy.

“We will press on and we will succeed,” President Barack Obama said at the White House.

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said, “As heavy a loss as this was, it would even be more tragic if we allowed it to derail this country from our efforts to defeat al-Qaida and deny them a safe haven in Afghanistan.”

In Kabul, German Brig. Gen. Carsten Jacobson, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition, said, “The incident, as tragic as it was in its magnitude, will have no influence on the conduct of operations.”

Jacobson said troops continued Monday to recover every last piece of the helicopter and that no one was being allowed in or out of the heavily secured crash site during the investigation. A ceremony was held at Bagram Air Field, a massive military installation north of Kabul, to pay respect to fallen service members being sent back to the United States.

Marine Gen. John Allen, the new top commander of U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan, released a statement early Tuesday in honor of the fallen American and Afghan troops. “In life they were comrades in arms and in death they are bound forever in this vital cause,” he said. “We cherish this selfless sacrifice.”

Pentagon officials said two C-17 aircraft carrying the remains of U.S. and Afghan troops killed in the crash left Afghanistan Monday night en route to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware. They said that there will be no public media coverage at the Dover base during the ceremony that typically takes place when the bodies of fallen troops arrive because the badly damaged remains are mingled and still being identified.

Many of the Americans who died were members of the Navy’s SEAL Team 6, the unit that conducted the raid that killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden at his hideout in Pakistan. But none of the SEALs killed in the crash took part in the bin Laden mission. The official name of the SEAL team is the Naval Special Warfare Development Group.

The troops, who were packed into the twin-rotor chopper, crashed while on a mission that targeted a Taliban leader in the mountainous and heavily forested Sayd Abad district of Wardak, the coalition said. The helicopter was transporting them to the scene of an ongoing fight between coalition forces and insurgents.

Ali Ahmad Khashai, deputy governor of Wardak province, said Taliban insurgents frequently move through the Tangi Valley.

“This area concerns us because many attacks in Wardak are organized and planned in Tangi,” he said. “The enemy is active and the (military) operations have not been effective, unfortunately, because it is between three provinces. Maybe there are mountains and forests between these provinces that no one is taking responsibility for.”

The Taliban claimed they downed the helicopter with a rocket. U.S. military officials said the helicopter was hit as it was trying to land. Although the investigation has not yet been completeted, the coalition said in a statement that the “helicopter was reportedly fired on by an insurgent rocket-propelled grenade.”

Coalition troops on the ground searching for the Taliban leader saw several insurgents armed with rocket-propelled grenades and AK-47 assault rifles moving through the area, the coalition said. U.S. officials said the ground force was made up of U.S. Army Rangers, who regularly work with the SEALs. During the gunbattle, the ground force called for assistance.

“Those additional personnel were inbound to the scene when the CH-47 carrying them crashed, killing all on board,” the coalition said.

A U.S. official said the force was acting as what is called an “Immediate Reaction Force,” flying in to provide extra firepower to subdue a target, rather than a Quick Reaction Force, which comes in to stage a rescue. But multiple officials say hard questions are being asked about whether the target merited risking so many elite troops.

More U.S. special operations troops are in Afghanistan — about 10,000 — than in any other theater of war. The forces, often joined by Afghan troops, are among the most effective weapons in the coalition’s arsenal, conducting surveillance, infiltration and night raids on the compounds of suspected insurgents.

From April to July of this year, 2,832 special operations raids captured 2,941 insurgents and killed 834 militants — twice as many as over the same period last year, according to statistics provided by the coalition.

Special operations troops are expected to have a significant role as American forces begin drawing down as part of President Barack Obama’s plan to bring 10,000 U.S. troops home by year’s end and as many as 23,000 more by September 2012. Afghan President Hamid Karzai wants Afghan security forces to be in the lead across the nation by the end of 2014 when foreign combat forces will have returned home or moved into supportive roles.

Special operations raids are likely to be the lasting U.S. footprint in Afghanistan, according to recent comments by Douglas Lute, the White House’s senior adviser on the war. He predicted the current blend will shift from mostly classic counterinsurgency operations — in which conventional forces clear, hold and build, and special operations forces conduct raids — to Afghan forces clearing and holding. But even then, U.S. special operations forces will likely remain, both hunting militants in night raids and working with the local forces.

Saturday’s mission was flown by a conventional air crew, instead of the overstretched pilots of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, two U.S. officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation was ongoing.

There are so many special operations missions every night— a dozen or so, adding up to roughly 300 a month — that they often are assigned to non-special-operations pilots and aircraft, according to one officer in the war zone and a second U.S. official familiar with the special operations missions. Both spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to comment publicly.

Conventional helicopter pilot crews sometimes support up to two missions in the same night, the officer in the war zone said.

The 160th special operations regiment flies more technically advanced Chinook helicopters and spends more time on the ground in Afghanistan than many conventional military pilot crews do. But a U.S. official familiar with their operations said that while those advantages help in cases of bad weather or tricky terrain, there is little that any crew can do to move a slow-moving Chinook out of harm’s way when under fire.

Anthony Cordesman, a national security analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said nothing done to a helicopter can prevent it from being vulnerable if it hovers, lands or takes off in any area where militants are present.

“We should not overreact to worst-case incidents or exaggerate their tactical and strategic importance,” Cordesman said.

———

Baldor reported from Washington. Associated Press Intelligence Writer Kimberly Dozier contributed to this story from Washington, Patrick Quinn and Rahim Faiez from Kabul.

Click to expand...

Pentagon officials said two C-17 aircraft carrying the remains of U.S. and Afghan troops killed in the crash left Afghanistan Monday night en route to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.

Click to expand...

Army times said:

Pistols with a shot at replacing the M9

By Lance M. Bacon - Staff writer
Posted : Sunday Aug 28, 2011 8:56:27 EDT
Below: See the contenders to replace the M9.

The Army has a new pistol in its sights. After 25 years of action, the M9 is on its way out as officials are confident they can give soldiers a better pistol at a better price. The goal is to replace all 239,000 M9s and the concealable M11s.

“The M9 is at the end of its lifecycle,” said Maj. Art Thomas, small arms branch chief at the Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Ga. “It is an old weapon. We can do a lot better with what technology can provide us now.”

Lethality is among the M9’s several “limitations,” said Daryl Easlick, project officer for close effects. The requirement for a new pistol calls for “an increase in permanent wound channel,” which suggests something more powerful than a 9mm may be on the horizon.

Other limitations the new pistol must overcome include:

• The slide-mounted safety. When solders rack the slide to alleviate a jam or stovepipe in the M9, they often inadvertently engage the safety — and won’t realize this until they reacquire and squeeze the trigger.

• The open-slide design, which allow contaminants and dirt into the system.

• The lack of a modular grip, integrated rail and night-sight capabilities.

• The inability to suppress.

• Limited service life — replacement should have a service life of at least 25,000 rounds.

Service life is a key issue, Easlick said, noting that the M9 is only required to fire 5,000 rounds.

“We are looking for a threshold capability ... in the magnitude of five times better than that,” he said.

Beretta insists that the M9’s numbers are well beyond 5,000 rounds. Two-thirds of all M9s fire 5,000 rounds with one or no malfunctions, said Gabriele de Plano, Beretta’s vice president of military sales and marketing. Slides have 35,000-round durability, frames last for 30,000 rounds and locking blocks for 22,000. The average reliability of all M9s is 17,500 rounds without a stoppage.
Related reading

Love it or hate it: troops sound off on M9

During one test conducted under Army supervision, 12 M9 pistols shot 168,000 rounds without a malfunction.

But that is not the norm. Easlick said an M9 is tempo-dependent, and its service life is “exponentially” dropped when it is used as an offensive handgun and in intense combat training.

To get the changes it desires, the Army adopted the Air Force’s Modular Handgun System proposal, which had been approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council but lost steam in recent years.

The Army plan has jumped through most hoops and is at Army Headquarters awaiting approval. Of course, there is the reality of diminishing defense dollars. But Thomas said all participants are “working diligently” to create a budget-friendly fielding and funding plan.

While timelines remain to be seen, the Army in a June 30 omnibus reprogramming request placed procurement in fiscal 2014.
Your next pistol

Officials are not allowed to discuss the selection process while requirements are being written. But Thomas did say the next pistol would be a commercial, off-the-shelf product.

Narrowing the field is not especially hard. The soldier requirements division must first consider existing programs of record. If another government agency has a pistol program that meets or exceeds the Army’s requirements, that is the one you will get.

There are some strong contenders in that category, and they are not limited to the .45 caliber and 9mm varieties. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in 2010 made a big switch to the .40 caliber, and many military leaders would like to do the same.

Smith and Wesson’s .40 cal M&P nudged the Glock 22 and 27 in the ATF competition. Scores were so close that both received a part of the $80 million contract — and prime standing as the Army enters its search.

“It’s kind of hard to beat the Smith and Wesson M&P right now,” said one industry insider from a competing company, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “It is a polymer gun with high-capacity steel magazines. It has a positive safety and ambidextrous controls ... they simply came out of the gate with the right gun.”

Other companies with existing government contracts and weapons that meet Army requirements include:

• Beretta. The company in 2010 launched the 92A1 9mm and 96A1 .40 S&W pistols. They include increased capacity magazines, removable front sights, an accessory rail, captive recoil spring assembly, frame recoil buffer and sand-resistant magazines. The Army would need no transitional training if it chose the 9mm, and parts compatibility is 90 percent.

Beretta’s next-generation Px4 family of pistols has polymer frames, modular grips and a rotary barrel system similar to a bolt-action rifle. The Px4 Storm Special Duty .45 ACP, which had been submitted for the now-defunct Joint Combat Pistol program, includes a long barrel for suppressor mounting.

• Sig Sauer. Many Navy SEALs carry the company’s P226, and the Coast Guard has adopted the P229. The industry insider called the Sig a “workhorse,” but said the P229 is an unlikely selection because it is double-action only and has no positive safety.

The .40 caliber P250 probably has little to no chance. The pistol had 58 stoppages, 13 of which were gun-induced, during the ATF competition. Smith & Wesson had 16 shooter-induced stoppages and Glock had seven, and neither had gun-induced stoppages.

• Heckler & Koch. The HK P2000 is lauded by the Border Patrol. They love its modular grips, dual slide release levers and mounting rails that easily accommodate a variety of lights, lasers and accessories.

• Glock. A longtime favorite among many special operators, the latest variants include modular grips and shorter trigger distances. The recoil spring also has been replaced with a dual recoil spring assembly to reduce recoil and increase life cycle.

But the venerable Glock does have its detractors, the industry insider said — primarily because the pistol lacks an external safety. In addition, there is no metal-on-metal contact in the magazine catch-recess area, causing magazines to wear out faster and sometimes drop out of the gun.

• Colt and Springfield. Both companies are competing to replace the Marine Corps’ M45 Close Quarter Battle Pistol. If the winner becomes a program of record before the Army opens its selection process, then it would be in the running. But Colt’s variant is a single-action, cocked and locked pistol, which is not popular with many folks in Big Army.

Click to expand...

“It’s kind of hard to beat the Smith and Wesson M&P right now,” said one industry insider from a competing company, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “It is a polymer gun with high-capacity steel magazines. It has a positive safety and ambidextrous controls ... they simply came out of the gate with the right gun.”

Click to expand...

LOS ANGELES, CA – The Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) Ray Mabus announced today that the United States Navy has donated the Battleship USS Iowa to the Pacific Battleship Center, a Los Angeles‐based nonprofit on course to turn the ship into a permanent museum and memorial at the Port of Los Angeles.

The donation of the USS Iowa to the Pacific Battleship Center, under the Navy’s ship donation program, is the culmination of years of work by many dedicated volunteers. The USS Iowa is the only Iowa‐class battleship that has not been saved and turned into a permanent museum,and was the last battleship available for donation.

“We want to thank the Secretary of the Navy, and the entire United States Navy, for the donation of the USS Iowa to the Pacific Battleship Center,” stated Robert Kent, the President of the nonprofit. “With this award, the USS Iowa will become a permanent museum, memorial and educational center. We can now move forward with the work necessary to restore the ship and to bring her to the Port of Los Angeles.

”The Pacific Battleship Center acknowledged the support and thousands of hours volunteers have contributed to this project. “Without the support of our volunteers, the people of the Los Angeles area and the people of the State of Iowa, this dream would not have become a reality,”stated Kent.

While there are too many people to thank for this great achievement, we do want to make special mention of the efforts of Congressman Buck McKeon, Los Angeles Mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, the Los Angeles City Council and their President, Eric Garcetti, the Los Angeles Harbor Commission and their President, Cindy Miscikowski, and Craig Nelson of Torrey‐PinesBank. This award also would not have happened without the tireless support of former Los Angeles City Councilwoman and current Congresswoman Janice Hahn. “Without the persistence of Congresswoman Hahn, the USS Iowa would not be coming to the Port of Los Angeles,” remarked Kent.

The people of Iowa were also instrumental in making this day a reality. We would like to thank Governor Terry Branstad and the Iowa Legislature for their support in appropriating $3 million this year for the restoration of the USS Iowa. The entire Iowa Congressional Delegation also supported the efforts to bring the USS Iowa to Los Angeles. Robert Kent commented, “I would like to particularly thank Congressman Tom Latham and Senator Charles Grassley, for their special efforts to help ensure that the USS Iowa becomes a permanent memorial for all of our citizens.”

As the Pacific Battleship Center moves forward with the restoration and relocation of the USS Iowa, there are still numerous opportunities to be part of this historic project. You may contact the USS Iowa’s new caretakers at

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Click to expand...

Senate appropriators: Kill JLTV, cut JSF $695M

By Kate Brannen - Staff writer Military times
Posted : Tuesday Sep 13, 2011 12:30:52 EDT

In its markup of the 2012 defense spending bill, the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on defense is recommending terminating the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and cutting $695 million from the Air Force’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.

The moves are part of a $26 billion cut to the Pentagon’s 2012 budget request.

Last week, the full appropriations committee agreed to allocate $513 billion for the Pentagon’s 2012 base budget, not including military construction. This freezes defense spending at 2011 spending levels.

The full committee also agreed to fully fund the president’s request of $118 billion for overseas contingency operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“While this was not an easy allocation to meet, I can assure you that this recommendation takes care of our men and women in uniform and their families, fully supports military readiness, protects the forces, and maintains our technological edge,” committee chairman Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, said Tuesday in his opening statement.

At the markup, Inouye announced a cut of $1.2 billion to JSF. However, later in the day, a committee spokesman issued a correction, saying the recommendation was for $695 million.

The subcommittee bill will now move to the full committee, which plans to mark up the bill Thursday.

Fiscal year 2012 begins Oct. 1. Without any appropriations bills passed, Congress will have to pass a temporary spending measure, called a continuing resolution, to keep the government funded beyond Sept. 30.

To meet the $26 billion cut, the subcommittee recommended nearly 600 line-item reductions in the bill.

“Most of these reductions are made as a result of program terminations, schedule delays, programs changes since submission of the budget last February, inadequate justification, unaffordable future year costs, or corrections to poor fiscal discipline,” said Inouye, who also serves as subcommittee chair.

For example, the Defense Department identified more than $10 billion that they no longer need in 2012, including $5 billion in excess funds due to troop reductions in Afghanistan that President Obama announced after the budget was submitted.

Inouye said the commander in Afghanistan who oversees training Afghanistan Security Forces identified $1.6 billion that is no longer needed. Another $135 million was cut from the Air Force’s tanker replacement program because service leaders said they could not spend the money by the end of next year.

As for the cut to the JSF program, Inouye cited “excessive concurrency in development and production,” and recommended maintaining 2011 production levels for two more years “in order to limit out-year cost growth.”

“The test program is only 10 percent complete, yet the request continues to ramp up production of aircraft in fiscal years 2012 and 2013,” Inouye said. “For each aircraft we build this early in the test program, we will have to pay many millions in the future to fix the problems that are identified in testing.”

The subcommittee also recommends terminating the Army and Marine Corps JLTV program, which was started as an effort to build a next-generation Humvee.

The program has faced growing scrutiny over the last few years, with other vehicles promising similar capabilities and the Marine Corps expressing concern about the vehicle’s weight. Since the program’s inception, the services have fielded thousands of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected All Terrain Vehicles to Afghanistan and have launched a competitive Humvee recapitalization program.

In recommending termination, Inouye cited “excessive cost growth and constantly changing requirements. The committee believes that alternatives exist today to meet the Army and Marine Corps’ requirements to recapitalize and competitively upgrade the Humvee fleet, and supports funding for those programs.”

DoD is currently paying three industry teams to develop JLTV technology.

In February, DoD announced that the award of the JLTV engineering and manufacturing development contract would be delayed until January 2012 because the Army had changed its requirements.

“Some defense and trade analysts suggest that the JLTV program will cost well over $10 billion and possibly as much as $30 billion to $70 billion, depending on the final cost of the vehicles chosen and the number of vehicles procured,” the Congressional Research Service reported in March.

The subcommittee bill does not fund the Navy’s request for an additional Mobile Landing Platform ship, noting the Congress funded it in the 2011 appropriations bill.

“We believe that this remains an important requirement and expect the Navy to fund the third ship in the fiscal year 2013 request,” Inouye said.

In some areas, the subcommittee recommended increased spending.

The bill includes an additional $250 million for vehicle survivability upgrades for MRAPs, an additional $500 million for National Guard and Reserve equipment, and an additional $240 million for Abrams tank upgrades.

It also fully funds the Pentagon’s research and development request and increases funding for cyber security, nanotechnology and space situational awareness.

Speaking to reporters after the markup, Inouye said the bill included funding for the Medium Extended Air Defense System, a tri-national program with Germany and Italy.

The Pentagon announced in February that it no longer intended to purchase the MEADS system, but required $800 million over the next three years to capitalize on the research and development.

The subcommittee fully funds the Pentagon’s requested end strength and the 1.6 percent authorized pay raise for military personnel.

Some may consider the recommended cuts as tough, but Inouye said the subcommittee believed they were “fair and prudent.”

Click to expand...

Libya’s unsecured weapons remain U.S. concern

By Ryan Lucas - The Associated Press
Posted : Wednesday Sep 14, 2011 11:05:45 EDT

TRIPOLI, Libya — The potential proliferation of both conventional and unconventional weapons in Libya after six months of civil war is a “key concern” for the United States, a senior American official said Wednesday.

The conflict that ended Moammar Gadhafi’s 42-year rule and sent the former dictator into hiding also threw open the gates to his regime’s extensive armories. The country’s new leaders, who are struggling to establish a government, have failed to secure many of the weapons caches. Witnesses have watched looters, former rebel fighters or anyone with a truck carry them away.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Jeffery Feltman told reporters in Tripoli that Washington already has people working with Libya’s new rulers about the possible proliferation of shoulder-fired missiles, as well as dangerous chemicals like mustard gas.

“This is certainly an issue we are concerned with, the Libyan officials are concerned with, because it poses potential risks not only to Libyans, but to the region as a whole,” said Feltman, who was in Tripoli for talks with the former rebels’ National Transitional Council.

Journalists and human rights groups have discovered huge weapons depots around Tripoli since the former rebels swept into the capital Aug. 21. Many of the sites are poorly guarded and have already been looted of mines, mortars and even shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles designed to bring down airplanes, helicopters or drones.

The greatest concern, however, is the proliferation of unconventional weapons, such as mustard gas and other chemical agents.

Despite worries about other weapons, Feltman said “to the best of our knowledge” stores of mustard gas “are containerized in bulk form accountable to the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons), and we believe from monitoring that they are where they are supposed to be.”

Last week, the U.N. chief weapons watchdog said Libya’s remaining chemical weapon stockpiles are believed to be secure.

Ahmet Uzumcu, director general of the OPCW, said his inspectors left the country in February when the uprising started and will return “when the conditions allow us.” He added that he had heard from sources that the “remaining stockpiles of chemical weapons are secured.” He did not identify his sources.

In 2004, Gadhafi agreed to dismantle his weapons of mass destruction, and his regime underscored its commitment by using bulldozers to crush 3,300 unloaded bombs that could have been used to deliver chemical weapons.

Click to expand...

Destroyer CO sacked after ship fired on boat

By Sam Fellman - Staff writer Military times
Posted : Wednesday Sep 7, 2011 19:26:54 EDT

The commanding officer of the destroyer The Sullivans was fired Wednesday, three weeks after his ship mistakenly fired at a fishing boat during a gunnery exercise, the Navy said.

Cmdr. Mark Olson was relieved of command of the Mayport, Fla.-based destroyer by Vice Adm. Daniel Holloway, 2nd Fleet commander, due to “a loss of confidence in his ability to command,” 2nd Fleet said in a release.

He is the 18th commanding officer fired this year, surpassing last year’s total.

Olson was in command on Aug. 17 when the ship was conducting a gunnery exercise at the Cherry Point Operating Range Area, off the North Carolina coast. During the exercise, The Sullivans mistook a fishing vessel for a towed gunnery target and began firing inert rounds at the vessel. They landed close but did not strike the boat. None of the fishermen was harmed, 2nd Fleet said.

The incident delayed the ship’s deployment, the Navy said.

At admiral’s mast, Holloway determined that the accident stemmed from Olson’s failure to follow established procedures.

Olson, a 1992 Naval Academy graduate, previously commanded coastal patrol ships Sirocco and Firebolt and served as executive officer aboard cruiser Lake Erie, according to his official bio. Messages seeking comment from Olson were not immediately returned.

This is not the first incident to sideline The Sullivans. In March 2010, the ship struck a buoy while entering the port of Manama, Bahrain. The commanding officer, Cmdr. Neil Funtanilla, was fired two months later.

The Sullivans was scheduled to deploy Wednesday but was delayed since the ship will now have to complete predeployment certifications, including some exercises, under a new CO.

Cmdr. Sylvester Steele will assume command of The Sullivans on Thursday, 2nd Fleet said. Olson has been reassigned to administrative duties with Destroyer Squadron 14.

Click to expand...

Japan facilities preparing for more Marines

By Dan Lamothe - Staff writer Military times
Posted : Wednesday Sep 14, 2011 9:48:18 EDT

The Marine Corps is preparing facilities in Japan for the possible arrival of thousands of deploying infantrymen.

The grunts will be assigned to Japan through the Unit Deployment Program, a 34-year-old effort that rotates units from the U.S. to Japan for training. The program has operated in a reduced capacity since March 2005, when the Corps began diverting many units that would have gone to Japan to Iraq and Afghanistan instead.

But as the war in Afghanistan winds down, a resurgence of UPD is expected.

It’s unclear how many infantry battalions will deploy to Japan, or when the assignments will begin. If the program reverts to the structure in place before the Iraq war, it could mean at least 3,000 more Marines routinely deploying to Japan to conduct training missions, develop unit cohesion and work with other Pacific Rim countries, such as Thailand and the Philippines.

Battalions will deploy for six months at a time, and be based primarily at Camp Schwab, a base on the northeastern corner of Okinawa. Schwab is home to the 4th Marine Regiment, commanded by Col. Stephen Neary.

The camp is ready to take on one battalion at any time, said Maj. Gen. Peter Talleri, deputy commander of Marine Corps Bases Japan, in a Marine Corps news release. He toured the base’s armory, motor-transport garages and other facilities with Neary on Aug. 19.

Before 2005, the Corps regularly sent four infantry battalions, an amphibious assault company, a light armored reconnaissance company and two artillery batteries to Japan through UDP. The service cut back due to needs in combat, however. One rotational battalion — currently 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, out of Twentynine Palms, Calif. — has remained in Japan to augment the Okinawa-based 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit.

“The resumption of the infantry battalion unit deployment program is a top priority for 3rd Marine Division,” said Brig. Gen. Frederick Padilla, the division’s commanding general, in a news release. “Our ability to be effectively engaged in the Pacific will be greatly enhanced by these forward-deployed units.”

Click to expand...

Soldiers top priority for new CSA
WASHINGTON (Army News Service, Sept. 9, 2011) -- A day after being sworn in as the new chief of staff of the Army, Gen. Raymond T. Odierno laid out some priorities for his tenure.

Among those are ensuring the continued training and preparation of Soldiers to provide a ready force to combatant commanders, the development of Army leaders, the strengthening of family programs, and a desire for all Soldiers to be able to tell the "Army story."

"Soldiers are the strength of our Army," Odierno said during a media roundtable event Thursday. "I must continue to provide trained and ready forces to Iraq and Afghanistan and in other places around the world where our presence is required. I also have to look to the future, 40 years out, and develop what I believe it is the right versatile mix of capabilities, formations and equipment which have the key characteristics that I think will be important in the future."

Leadership development to accommodate the future environment is also critical, Odierno said. Future leaders must be adaptable, agile, and able to operate in a threat environment that includes a combination of regular warfare, irregular warfare, terrorist activity, and criminality.

"We have to adapt their leader development programs," Odierno said. "We have incredibly good leaders today, but we have to continue to develop them to address the many complex problems that I think we're going to face in the future."

The general said the best leaders create environments that allow individuals to grow and trust their subordinates.

"The best units I have ever been associated with are those who think they're really good, who have an environment where people feel deal they are empowered, and they work together collectively to achieve a goal," Odierno said. "We can't have leaders who are risk averse, we can't have leaders who are micro-managers and don't trust their subordinates -- [that's ] the kind of toxic leadership that we can't afford."

Odierno also said Soldier and family programs must be strengthened, and redundancies across programs must be removed to ensure the Army has "just the best programs that are capable of helping our families."

Additionally, he wants Soldiers to make themselves available to tell the Army story.

"I think the Army has a great story, and I think sometimes we don't tell that story," he said, saying Soldiers and leaders must "make ourselves available to discuss the issues, to discuss what's good about our Army."

Budget and personnel cuts, Odierno said, will likely leave the Army smaller -- perhaps even smaller than the 520,000 directed by former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

"The initial reduction [to] 520,000, I think we all think is reasonable, based on the assumptions. And the assumption of that was that we would be coming out of Afghanistan in 2014," he said. "So if that assumption bears out, that number is one we certainly can sustain."

But Odierno wasn't sure the initial plans for that many Soldiers would pan out in the end.

"Do I think we'll end up at 520,000? Probably not," he said.

The Army's new chief said what's important is that force reductions happen at a pace that allows the service to maintain its capabilities.

"The important piece here when we talk about force structure and troop strength reductions is that we do it in such a way that we allow ourselves the flexibility and capability to expand," he said. "My comments have been: be careful of going too small too fast. And the reason I say that is because if you go too small too fast, it takes away your flexibility."

If the Army would still be able to fight two wars at the same time with troop reductions is also something Odierno said is being looked at carefully now.

"We're still doing some analysis," he said. "I think at 520, we could probably do it fairly close. Below 520, I don't know."

Click to expand...

Schwartz: F-22 grounding ends Wednesday

By Brian Everstine - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Sep 19, 2011 17:33:01 EDT

The F-22 Raptor will take to the air Wednesday after four months on the ground for safety reasons.

Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz announced an end to the fleetwide stand-down Monday — first in a letter to Congress, then in a statement posted on the Air Force’s website.

Schwartz approved a plan developed by Air Combat Command that allows the 160 twin-engine fighters to fly above 50,000 feet — the Raptor flies at 60,000 feet in normal circumstances — after an extensive inspection of every aircraft’s life support systems. The systems also will be inspected daily.

In addition, the plan calls for pilots to undergo physiological tests and to use additional protective equipment, although the statement did not specify the equipment.

In his statement, Schwartz said he based his decision on studies conducted by the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, which has been investigating the Raptor since the stand-down took effect May 3.

“We now have enough insight from recent studies and investigations that a return to flight is prudent and appropriate," Schwartz said. “We’re managing the risks with our aircrews, and we’re continuing to study the F-22’s oxygen systems and collect data to improve its performance.”

Investigators initially believed a malfunction of the F-22’s On-Board Oxygen Generating System, or OBOGS, caused 14 cases of hypoxia, a condition that can bring on nausea, headache or fatigue when the body is deprived of oxygen.

Capt. Jeffrey Haney died late last year in an F-22 crash about 100 miles north of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, where he was assigned. The cause of the crash has not been made public.

Click to expand...

Replacement timeline for T-38 remains murky

By Dave Majumdar - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Sep 19, 2011 17:04:25 EDT

The Air Force needs to replace its aging fleet of T-38 Talon jet trainers, but when the service will be able to do so is an open question.

Gen. Edward Rice, Air Education and Training Command chief, said Monday at the Air Force Association’s fall meeting in National Harbor, Md., that with the large numbers of F-35 Lightning II fifth-generation stealth fighters set to enter the fleet, the Air Force needs to move away from training pilots on the T-38 and F-16 as it does now.
Related reading

“It’s not a matter of if,” Rice sad. “In my mind it’s just a matter of when.”

The Air Force has a number of other priorities, but it must decide when it will be able to slot in a replacement aircraft.

Air Force Secretary Michael Donley concurred that the service needs to replace the T-38.

“We recognize the need for a T-38 replacement,” he said.

But Rice also said that replacing the T-38 is not urgent. The Air Force can fly the T-38 “into the foreseeable future,” Rice said, but it would require some structural modifications.

The problem is that as the geriatric aircraft ages, it becomes more costly to maintain. At some point, the cost will become unsustainable, Rice said.

But the Air Force still has “some flexibility” in its requirement to replace the T-38, Rice said.

Click to expand...