Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2018, 02:12
by spazsinbad
Basic instincts: Resetting the core operational mindset of the USMC
11 Sep 2018 Michael Fabey

"Facing mounting coastal threats, the US Marine Corps is developing new methods and mindsets to face its foes and remain relevant, as Michael Fabey reports: After years of fighting on land in Iraq, the US Marine Corps (USMC) has returned to its naval roots only to find its traditional method of conducting amphibious warfare being challenged in a way modern marines have never before faced. Squaring off against the kind of peer competition that the service has not experienced since the Cold War, the USMC is formulating a new way of conducting combat operations in the littorals while still maintaining its traditional operational skillset.

One of the most promising amphibious warfare concepts being explored and developed by the USMC involves expeditionary advance bases (EABs). The concept, new to the US marines, turns traditional marine basing on its head. Instead of relying on the full-frontal assault and seizure that can be mounted by a traditional amphibious readiness group (ARG) with fixed bases, under the EAB concept small, mobile operations bases would be established inside the attack arc of an adversary.

An EAB would enable marines to harass adversaries, keep their ambitions in check, and exert a special kind of sea-land control – or at least prevent a foe from exerting its own. This ‘inside force’ is designed to persist forward within range of adversary long-range fires; accept greater risk than the traditional force might; be more passively defended; take advantage of partner proximity; provide intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) for the ARG ‘outside force’;
be inherently resilient; invert cost imposition; buy time for other operations; and create enemy uncertainty.

Additionally, EABs would get critical marine infrastructure and vulnerable capabilities ‘off the X’, as the USMC would say, which simply means creating a smaller, more mobile force that is much harder for enemy forces to target than a traditional base. Marines could employ trucks, barges, ferries, and other non-traditional vehicles to provide the necessary mobility as well as better mission support continuity. An EAB is designed to provide the essential functions of a traditional base but with a less vulnerable, more resilient support infrastructure.

“It’s a myth that when we deploy with an intact MAGTF [Marine Air-Ground Task Force] we put afloat and put ashore,” USMC Major General David Coffman, US Navy (USN) Director of Expeditionary Warfare, told Jane’s. Marines, he warned, can no longer count on using a full amphibious assault to establish a major secure base of operations in relatively virgin territory. “There is no immature theatre,” Maj Gen Coffman said. “Somebody’s already there.” In the case of an EAB, where the base is deep within what is essentially enemy territory, that somebody is an adversary or a peer competitor, so the goal of a theatre-located EAB is to wrest sea control from that foe....

...The USMC is now honing this operational concept. Marines are practising EAB operations during exercises and while conducting routine patrols, as one USMC officer told Jane’s. Soon, the corps would like to employ EABs throughout areas of contention and competition, so that wherever potential foes might try to exert power there could be an EAB keeping adversarial aggression in check....

Source: http://www.janes.com/images/assets/892/ ... e_USMC.pdf (0.4Mb)

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 10 Nov 2018, 18:19
by spazsinbad
Always playing catchup: "...“We have to embark a fifth-generation MAGTF on a fourth-generation ship,” he said...."
Expeditionary Warfare Director: ‘We’re Going to Do Sea Control in Different Ways’
09 Nov 2018 OTTO KREISHER

"WASHINGTON — The Marine general in charge of the Navy’s expeditionary warfare programs said his mission was not just “reinvigorating expeditionary warfare,” but to get Marines “back to naval warfighting” after two decades of primarily land combat.

Maj. Gen. David Coffman sketched out a plan to institute a program to strengthen and modernize mine warfare, which he called “an historically under-resourced and neglected capability,” then focusing on increasing the size and lethality of the amphibious fleet to enable the naval expeditionary forces “to go anywhere, anytime, and take what we need with us.”

Addressing a forum at the Hudson Institute, Coffman, director of expeditionary warfare on the Navy staff, said: “We need a next-generation expeditionary warfare that can operate across the range of military operations.” That means the ability to “fight tonight, fight tomorrow,” across all domains, combatant commands and the full range of military operations.

“Our goal is to reinvigorate naval expeditionary forces” to meet the “enduring need for power projection,” which will require the ability to gain sea control by new means including the historic Marine mission of seizing and defending expeditionary advanced bases, he said.

He also cited efforts to arm amphibious ships and to deploy on them Marine weapons that could help the naval forces fight through adversary’s defenses. “We’re going to do sea control in different ways,” he said....

Coffman also complained that inadequate command and control technology on the older amphibs, particularly the big decks, prevents the embarked Marine Air-Ground Task Forces (MAGTFs) from taking full advantage of its capabilities, such as the F-35B strike fighter with its fifth-generation sensors and data processing capabilities.

“We have to embark a fifth-generation MAGTF on a fourth-generation ship,” he said.


Due to the growing threat that Russia, China and maybe Iran could use long-range defenses to keep naval expeditionary forces away from a crisis zone, Coffman said there were considerations of putting more defensive and offensive weapons on the amphibs and the Marines employing their own long-range weapons from the ships or from expeditionary bases to help in the sea control fight. He did not provide any details."

Source: http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/201 ... ffman.html

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 07 Feb 2019, 01:04
by spazsinbad
CH-53E Refuels and Resupplies an F-35B Lightning II
05 Dec 2018 1st Marine Aircraft Wing

"Photo by Lance Cpl. Alexia Lythos
An F-35B Lightning II jet performs a vertical landing during a field carrier landing practice at Ie Shima Island, Okinawa, Japan, Dec. 5, 2018. The F-35B landed, refueled and took off for the first time at Ie Shima Island. The F-35B belongs to Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121, Marine Aircraft Group 12, 1st Marine Aircraft Wing. The FCLP prepares the F-35B pilots for situations faced while deployed on aircraft carriers. Pilots land within the same restrictions they would when landing on an aircraft carrier. An F-35B landing at Ie Shima Island demonstrates the air warfighting capability, operational flexibility and tactical supremacy that this platform brings to the Indo-Pacific region, our allies and our partners. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Alexia Lythos) https://cdn.dvidshub.net/media/thumbs/p ... 0w_q95.jpg "

Image

Source: https://www.dvidshub.net/image/4949127/ ... first-time

CH-53E Refuels and Resupplies an F-35B Lightning II [VIDEO now on YouTube below]
23 Jan 2019 1st Marine Aircraft Wing

"Video by Cpl. Dakota Heathwarr
Marines with Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron 465, 1st Marine Aircraft Wing, refuel and resupply an F-35B Lightning II jet with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121, 1st MAW, during Distributed STOVL Operations (DSO) on Ie Shima island, Japan, Jan. 23, 2019. The rehearsal enabled CH-53E helicopters to re-fuel and re-arm F-35B Lightning II jets from a Forward Arming and Refueling Point (FARP), significantly improving the operational flexibility, survivability, and lethality of the F-35B. The FARP provided a hot refuel and hot reload for multiple aircraft with All Up Rounds (AUR), also known as a completely assembled weapon, giving pilots the ability to stay in the fight longer, and accomplish more missions in a shorter period of time from austere locations. (U.S. Marine Corps video by Cpl. Dakota Heathwarr)"

Source: https://www.dvidshub.net/video/658039/c ... ghtning-ii

USMC F-35B & CH-53E Refuels and Resupplies Ie Shima Island https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtFVBG0kIMA


Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 07 Feb 2019, 14:32
by gc
It appears in the first few days of a shooting war in Westpac that the USMC F-35B force will be the most survivable TACAIR asset in the theatre. Hope they have the numbers to hold the air till China expends its ballistic missile force and their air bases are reduced to rubble by massed cruise missile strikes from SSGNs and strategic bombers.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 13 Feb 2019, 22:12
by spazsinbad
F-35Bs Conduct Strikes in 'Beast Mode' for First Time in Pacific Region
12 Feb 2019 Hope Hodge Seck

"The Marines' F-35B Joint Strike Fighter achieved another first in recent weeks during an at-sea deployment when the aircraft conducted training strikes with an external ordnance load.

The 5th-generation fighters launched from the deck of the amphibious assault ship Wasp over the Philippine and East China Seas with a load of inert and live ordnance for a first-of-its-kind training mission, according to a news release from the deployed 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit. The training took place between Jan. 26 and Feb. 6, officials said....

...According to the 31st MEU release, the F-35Bs in the recent training evolution were loaded with CATM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missiles; 500-pound GBU-12 Paveway II bombs; and 1,000-pound GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munition [JDAM] ordnance. The aircraft dropped inert and high-explosive externally loaded ordnance during the exercise....

...Officials said this was the first time the F-35B executed strikes in the region with ordnance fully loaded...."

Photo: "An F-35B Lightning II with the F-35B detachment of Medium Marine Tiltrotor Squadron 262 (Reinforced) carries Guided Bomb Units above the East China Sea on Feb. 3, 2019. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Maj. Jesse Peppers) https://images03.military.com/sites/def ... s-1200.jpg


Source: https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2019/0 ... egion.html

Image

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 13 Feb 2019, 23:03
by popcorn
spazsinbad wrote:
F-35Bs Conduct Strikes in 'Beast Mode' for First Time in Pacific Region
12 Feb 2019 Hope Hodge Seck

"The Marines' F-35B Joint Strike Fighter achieved another first in recent weeks during an at-sea deployment when the aircraft conducted training strikes with an external ordnance load.

The 5th-generation fighters launched from the deck of the amphibious assault ship Wasp over the Philippine and East China Seas with a load of inert and live ordnance for a first-of-its-kind training mission, according to a news release from the deployed 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit. The training took place between Jan. 26 and Feb. 6, officials said....

...According to the 31st MEU release, the F-35Bs in the recent training evolution were loaded with CATM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missiles; 500-pound GBU-12 Paveway II bombs; and 1,000-pound GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munition [JDAM] ordnance. The aircraft dropped inert and high-explosive externally loaded ordnance during the exercise....

...Officials said this was the first time the F-35B executed strikes in the region with ordnance fully loaded...."

Photo: "An F-35B Lightning II with the F-35B detachment of Medium Marine Tiltrotor Squadron 262 (Reinforced) carries Guided Bomb Units above the East China Sea on Feb. 3, 2019. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Maj. Jesse Peppers) https://images03.military.com/sites/def ... s-1200.jpg


Source: https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2019/0 ... egion.html

Image


Unleash the Beast! All the more impressive in the context of the following account
.
https://sldinfo.com/2011/10/the-libyan- ... rspective/

2LD: What were the advantages to operate the Rafale from the Charles de Gaulle?

Lt. Gen. Desclaux: Basically, in the AOR, whether the Rafale was air or navy, it was conducting the same type of mission; 70 percent dynamic targeting, and 30 percent deliberate targeting. Obviously the advantage of being on an aircraft carrier is you’re closer from the theater of operation. The disadvantage when you take off from a French carrier is that your Rafale brings less ammunition than when taking off from a runway.

For example, with the Rafale from land, you can take off with two cruise missiles, as from the carrier it’s only one. The air force Rafale can take off from the land with six 250 kilos bombs – from the carrier, it only was four. You’re closer but you bring less ammunitions and you need gas anyway because in the dynamic targeting operation loiter time is important to mission success.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 14 Feb 2019, 00:28
by spazsinbad
:shock: Thanks for that refreshing quote with URL 'popcorn'. :mrgreen:

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 14 Feb 2019, 00:32
by popcorn
spazsinbad wrote::shock: Thanks for that refreshing quote with URL 'popcorn'. :mrgreen:

Context is everything. :wink:

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 21:50
by quicksilver
https://news.yahoo.com/stealth-strike-m ... NlYwNzYw--

“Stealth Strike: The Marines' Version of the F-35 Flew More Than 100 Combat Sorties

As it returns from its first combat deployment, the Marines' version of the F-35 is no longer a baby-faced boot.

F-35Bs flew more than 100 combat sorties against the Taliban and ISIS while deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Essex, said Lt. Col. Kyle Shoop, commander of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211.

"We overall supported more than 50 days of combat flying for over 1,200 flight hours," Shoop told Task & Purpose. "We supported both Operation Freedom's Sentinel up in the Afghanistan region as well as Operation Inherent Resolve over Syria/Iraq. We employed ordnance in both theaters on numerous days," Shoop said. "Every single one of the pilots employed ordnance in theater. So, we were very busy..."

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 22:06
by SpudmanWP
The Russian response:
That is a dirty capitalist lie because we never detected an F-35 in Syrian airspace therefore they did not exist...

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 25 Feb 2019, 22:15
by hythelday
Now that the Russians have read Marine press-releases and found out that F-35s were in the theater, I am sure they will publish reports of all the dogfights Su-35s won against them.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 03:00
by steve2267
To expand on QS' post a bit...

Marine F-35s Dropped a Bunch of Bombs on ISIS During 1st Middle East Deployment
by Gina Harkins 25 Feb 2019

The Marine Corps' F-35B Joint Strike Fighters led a big part of the campaign to demolish Islamic State terrorists in recent months, outpacing the combat flight hours flown by older aircraft on past deployments by 2-to-1.

Members of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211 flew 1,200 combat hours over Iraq and Syria, "making up a considerable portion of the ordnance that was dropping in theater," said Col. Chandler Nelms, commander of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit.

"They were very active and did very well," he told Military.com. "As the MEU commander, anytime I see aircraft flying that much, I get concerned about what the breaking point is going to be. But there's no breaking point with these guys; they just crushed it."

The Marines spent more than seven months deployed to the Pacific and Middle East. The F-35B detachment was assigned to the 13th MEU, which operated from aboard the amphibious assault ship Essex. It was the first time the Marine Corps' variant of the stealth jet, which can take off and land vertically, deployed to the Middle East.

The F-35B's first combat strike was in Afghanistan in September, where the Marine pilots were flying close-air support missions, said Lt. Col. Kyle Shoop, VMFA-211's commanding officer.

From there, they flew more than 50 days' worth of close-air support and defensive counter-air missions in Iraq and Syria.

"Every day, [the pilots] were supporting over six hours of time in theater," Shoop said.

The Marines were prepared for a higher-level fight had they been provoked by other actors in the region, he added. Their encounters with pilots from Russia, which is supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces, were minimal though, he said.

"We were aware they were airborne," Shoop said. "There are some established de-conflictions that are already set up between Russian and U.S. forces. They were all adhered to, but we were aware."

The F-35Bs were able to give troops on the ground more information than would have been possible in the AV-8B Harrier jump jet, which the Joint Strike Fighter will eventually replace. Its sensors are better in poor weather, Shoop said.

The Marines ended up flying the F-35B about twice as much as the Harrier flew on past deployments, Nelms said.

"A conservative estimate is the F-35 flew 100 percent more hours on this deployment than a typical deployment for a Harrier squadron," he said. "When you consider that their readiness was 75 percent or better ... while doubling the amount of flight hours being flown, it's a real testament to the aircraft and the maintainers."

The F-35B pilots weren't the only members of the MEU supporting the fight against ISIS. A CH-53E Super Stallion heavy-lift helicopter provided airlift in Iraq, Nelms said, and an artillery battery deployed to Syria with M777 howitzers.

"It was an exciting time to be doing so many different things," he said.

The MEU is expected to return to California this week.

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/02/25/marine-f-35s-dropped-bunch-bombs-isis-during-1st-middle-east-deployment.html


Hmmm... ready for the Ruskies... but nothing came of it. Over 100% more combat flight hours than would have been possible with Harriers. > 75% readiness... I'd say the kid's alright... Growing up quickly...

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 05:06
by SpudmanWP
steve2267 wrote: > 75% readiness...
Damn good for Block 2B

F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 05:17
by kimjongnumbaun
"F-35Bs flew more than 100 combat sorties against the Taliban and ISIS while deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Essex, said Lt. Col. Kyle Shoop, commander of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211."


"During its deployment, the F-35B squadron flew close air support missions over both Afghanistan and Syria, Shoop said. In Syria, the aircraft also helped assess the damage done by coalition airstrikes in bad weather because the F-35's radar is far better than the F/A-18 Hornets' sensors."

https://taskandpurpose.com/f-35-combat- ... ribsekR4SQ

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 05:28
by Corsair1963
"When you consider that their readiness was 75 percent or better ... while doubling the amount of flight hours being flown, it's a real testament to the aircraft and the maintainers."

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 05:33
by Corsair1963
Don't worry the "critics" will totally ignore it..... :?

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 05:53
by spazsinbad
SpudmanWP wrote:
steve2267 wrote: > 75% readiness...
Damn good for Block 2B

Not quite - BLOCK 3F: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=54421&p=401702&hilit=block#p401702
&/OR
viewtopic.php?f=58&t=13143&p=392677&hilit=Winter#p392677 [MIDDLE of POST for PARA]
11 Apr 2018: "... USS Essex will take on board a detachment from VMFA-211 this summer for deployment. VMFA-211’s F-35Bs will mark the first deployment of the 3F software..." http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20180411-F35.html

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 06:18
by SpudmanWP
Sweet.. missed that announcement... BAD Spud :bang: , BAD Spud :bang:

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 06:34
by spazsinbad
I've asked moderators to merge this thread with the one here: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=54445

Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 08:09
by spazsinbad
:twisted: 8) :devil: "2B or NOT 2B" That is the question. 'Hambone' :mrgreen: :shock: WaverDagger :doh: :drool: :roll:

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 08:48
by kimjongnumbaun
Apologies, I didn't realize someone already posted this article.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 14:33
by steve2267
kimjongnumbaun wrote:Apologies, I didn't realize someone already posted this article.


No worries. Not that specific article, but two other articles about the same story, per se. It's all good.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 14:53
by quicksilver
BZ for the successful first deployment.

However, if the reporting is correct, 1200hrs over 50 days w/ a 6hr avg sortie duration is two combat sections a day. (The 6hr ASD comes from LtCol Shoup in one of the other articles). The impressive part is not the hours nor the 75%, it is doing it afloat for 50 days.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 15:37
by sprstdlyscottsmn
qs, quick question. Are you saying "combat section" as a pair of F-35s sent on a sortie? When I run the numbers I get 4 aircraft per day with 6hr missions or 24 flight hours per day.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 15:45
by quicksilver
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:qs, quick question. Are you saying "combat section" as a pair of F-35s sent on a sortie? When I run the numbers I get 4 aircraft per day with 6hr missions or 24 flight hours per day.


Yes.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 16:15
by vilters
100 combat sorties over 50 days means exactly that. => 2 combat sorties /day.

One aircraft flew twice, or 2 aircraft flew ONCE. Sorry guys, nothing to write home about.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 16:44
by steve2267
vilters wrote:100 combat sorties over 50 days means exactly that. => 2 combat sorties /day.

One aircraft flew twice, or 2 aircraft flew ONCE. Sorry guys, nothing to write home about.


On its first combat deployment, the Marine Corps’ F-35 bombed both the Taliban and ISIS


"F-35Bs flew more than 100 combat sorties against the Taliban and ISIS while deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Essex, said Lt. Col. Kyle Shoop, commander of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211."

"We overall supported more than 50 days of combat flying for over 1,200 flight hours," Shoop told Task & Purpose. "We supported both Operation Freedom's Sentinel up in the Afghanistan region as well as Operation Inherent Resolve over Syria/Iraq. We employed ordnance in both theaters on numerous days," Shoop said. "Every single one of the pilots employed ordnance in theater. So, we were very busy."

...

Overall, the F-35 exceeded expectations during its first deployment, Shoop said. The squadron was able to keep 75 percent of its aircraft operational at all times, allowing it to "fly pretty much at will."

https://taskandpurpose.com/f-35-combat-deployment


Lol @ vilters.

50 days @ 1200 flt hours = 24 hrs per day. So one aircraft was up all day and night, or two aircraft sortied for 12 hours each. OR, if it is as the former Marine aviator on here stated, four aircraft (two sections) each flew a six hour sortie per day... then there were 200 sorties.

200 > 100

I don't see the problem here.

I was impressed at the > 75% combat mission readiness rate. But the one in the know was more impressed at the more than 50 days of sustained operation. (Not to mention it flew twice as much as the Harriers could have.)

You're correct Vilters... no story here. Nothing to see here folks... move along. Nothing to see...

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 17:00
by SpudmanWP
Is it considered a "sortie" if they don't drop the bomb?

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 17:16
by spazsinbad
SpudmanWP wrote:Is it considered a "sortie" if they don't drop the bomb?

What else would it be? Do YOU define a 'sortie' in some other way? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortie
"...In military aviation, a sortie is a combat mission of an individual aircraft, starting when the aircraft takes off. For example, one mission involving six aircraft would tally six sorties. …"

https://www.google.com/search?q=sortie+ ... ss&ie=&oe=

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 17:18
by citanon
The wording of the article caused me some confusion. 1200 hours IS 50 days. So my take is they are saying that the F-35B had 50 days in accumulated combat flight hours through the deployment.

At first I thought the ship was out for 50 days.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 17:27
by quicksilver
vilters wrote:100 combat sorties over 50 days means exactly that. => 2 combat sorties /day.

One aircraft flew twice, or 2 aircraft flew ONCE. Sorry guys, nothing to write home about.


The problem with that is the “1200hrs” quote. That makes the ASD 12; not unheard of, but very unlikely. Thus, my caveat “if the reporting is correct.”

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 17:30
by SpudmanWP
spazsinbad wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:Is it considered a "sortie" if they don't drop the bomb?

What else would it be? Do YOU define a 'sortie' in some other way?

I was just trying to make the numbers make sense.

My thought was if an F-35B goes up with a couple of 500lb JDAMs, circles the battlefield for a while waiting for the call, then RTBs without dropping them then maybe it was not counted in the specific metric that drove the report.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 17:34
by quicksilver
citanon wrote:The wording of the article caused me some confusion. 1200 hours IS 50 days. So my take is they are saying that the F-35B had 50 days in accumulated combat flight hours through the deployment.

At first I thought the ship was out for 50 days.


Ship typically out for about 6 mos. These days 6ish +/- a bit depending on what’s going on. 50 days on station launching jets in one lump would be unusual; ESGs do lotsa other stuff besides launch strike sorties.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 17:37
by spazsinbad
SpudmanWP wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:Is it considered a "sortie" if they don't drop the bomb?

What else would it be? Do YOU define a 'sortie' in some other way?

I was just trying to make the numbers make sense.

My thought was if an F-35B goes up with a couple of 500lb JDAMs, circles the battlefield for a while waiting for the call, then RTBs without dropping them then maybe it was not counted in the specific metric that drove the report.

OK - yes Confucius REIGNS eh. :roll:

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 18:56
by kimjongnumbaun
vilters wrote:100 combat sorties over 50 days means exactly that. => 2 combat sorties /day.

One aircraft flew twice, or 2 aircraft flew ONCE. Sorry guys, nothing to write home about.


One, a combat sortie can be 1 aircraft or 100 aircraft in a sortie, and aircraft often do not fly alone. Please don't comment on things as if you have knowledge about them but clearly demonstrate that you don't.

Two, they maintained a 75% readiness rate which is better than the average for legacy aircraft. That is irrespective of sorties.

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 19:02
by quicksilver
“Term Source: JP 3-30 (Command and Control of Joint Air Operations)

1.) In air operations, an operational flight by one aircraft.

In the United States, military vocabulary is standardized by the Department of Defence. These terms are used by the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.”

https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Document ... jp3_30.pdf

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 19:17
by wrightwing
vilters wrote:100 combat sorties over 50 days means exactly that. => 2 combat sorties /day.

One aircraft flew twice, or 2 aircraft flew ONCE. Sorry guys, nothing to write home about.

"F-35Bs flew MORE than 100 combat sorties against the Taliban and ISIS while deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Essex,"

That's certainly a pronounced increase in OPTEMPO, and absolutely something to write home about, as is twice the missions as AV-8Bs could generate, and >75% MC rate.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 21:31
by spazsinbad
IIRC did not we read that some F-35Bs landed in Kandahar? How does that affect the mind boggle under discussion here.

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=54421&p=403086&hilit=Kandahar#p403086 [p.10 of F-35B in the ME for first time thread]

Also:
Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms page 225: "sortie — In air operations, an operational flight by one aircraft. (JP 3-30)" [cited by 'QS' earlier (I'm self referential much?)] https://fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/jp1_02.pdf (1.9Mb)

Another 3F software citation: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=54421&p=401681&hilit=land+software#p401681

Re: F-35 cuts its teeth over Iraq and Syria

Unread postPosted: 26 Feb 2019, 22:24
by quicksilver
wrightwing wrote:
vilters wrote:100 combat sorties over 50 days means exactly that. => 2 combat sorties /day.

One aircraft flew twice, or 2 aircraft flew ONCE. Sorry guys, nothing to write home about.

"F-35Bs flew MORE than 100 combat sorties against the Taliban and ISIS while deployed aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Essex,"

That's certainly a pronounced increase in OPTEMPO, and absolutely something to write home about, as is twice the missions as AV-8Bs could generate, and >75% MC rate.


The reporting seems to be a bit jumbled. I wouldn’t make too much about any of it apart from the fact that they went, they saw, they conquered, they brought all the jets home and they didn’t get bad headlines while doing so. Flight hour production for Harrier Dets aboard amphibs can vary greatly from float to float (by over 100 percent) as does aircraft availability. 75% is good but only compared to the somewhat depressed standards assumed these days with limited funding.

“They done good.” Leave it at that.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 28 Feb 2019, 01:12
by spazsinbad
First Marine F-35B Combat Deployment Hints at New Roles for Amphibious Ready Group
27 Feb 2019 Gidget Fuentes [LONG POST BEST READ AT SOURCE]

"After eight months at sea with a squadron of F-35B Lighting II Joint Strike Fighters, the Marines and the Navy are seeing how the next-generation aircraft will expand the effectiveness of U.S. amphibious forces....

...“The aircraft and its integration with the ship and integration with the mission exceed my expectations,” Lt. Col. Kyle Shoop, who commands VMFA-211, told USNI News. “Just in our time with 5th Fleet, we supported over 50 days of combat for over 1,200 flight hours … didn’t drop a single line of FRAG or combat support.”

At times, the jets flew off Essex for long missions, “and we kept employing ordnance in both theaters,” Shoop said, referring to Afghanistan for Operation Freedom Sentinel and Syria and Iraq for Operation Inherent Resolve.

“The jet itself proved to be very reliable. Throughout that whole time period, Marines did a great job keeping it serviceable,” he said. “We were gone away from the ship for an extreme amount of time – a lot of times over five, six hours away from the ship – and they’d turn them around that night to fly again the next day. So that went really well.”

The F-35B performed “like we expected,” Shoop added. “Some of the sensors onboard would do better than, say, a Harrier would through adverse weather or things like that. So it proved to be pretty versatile.”

The F-35B crews operated from Essex for nearly all missions, except when the ship pulled into port for a mid-deployment repair.

“We did step off the ship during that time to keep employing the aircraft in theater, so we did a short period of time ashore,” Shoop said. “We were used for defensive counter-air in-theater, as well as sustaining alerts on the ship, able to launch with air-to-air weapons,” he added....

...“We learned some things along the way, especially with supportability of low-observable airplane aboard the ship,” Shoop said. “Obviously, there’s a lot of corrosion concerns aboard the ship. Saltwater is on it all the time, so for over eight months we got to learn a lot of lessons from that. In fact, Lockheed was out here just recently. We hosted them. They are very interested in coming to check out one of the airplanes as we come back ashore, to capture those lessons, maybe change some materials, et cetera.”...

...“This was a great deployment for us, a great experience especially with being a part of a new, revolutionary aircraft and figuring out how we’re going to use (the F-35B),” Olin said. “There’s a lot of lessons that we learned and to be learned.”"

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/02/27/first- ... eady-group

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2019, 12:21
by spazsinbad
Marines seize an airfield and small island while testing tactics for fight against China
21 Mar 2019 Shawn Snow

"Marines with the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, or MEU, seized a small island and airfield with elite special operations airmen and soldiers as part of a test of its future fighting concept. That fighting concept, known as expeditionary advanced base operations, or EABO, will see Marines spread thinly across the vastness of the Pacific Ocean, operating from small bases — a tactic that will help Marines stay alive in a high-end fight with China. EABO is still in the early stages of experimentation. The concept recently was signed off by Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Robert B. Neller, but still awaits the signature of Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson.

It’s a fight that will require assistance from the other services and the recent exercise that spanned March 11–14 included participation by U.S. Air Force 353rd Special Operations Group and soldiers with 1st Battalion, 1st Special Forces Group, according to details in a command release....

...After the airfield was captured, Marines and members of the 353rd Special Operations Group air dropped supplies necessary to establish a refueling and arming point, according to the command release. The refueling point further enabled F-35B stealth-aircraft, the command release said. The Marines also inserted a rocket artillery system known as HIMARS via C-130J to bolster the island with long-range precision fires....

...The exercise included many elements of the Corps’ future vision of a fight with a near-peer rival such as long-range fires, distributed operations over vast distances, and use of high-tech F-35 aircraft…."

Source: https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your ... nst-china/

USMC Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations, or EABO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54b_gwKSu4o


Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2019, 12:28
by marsavian
EABO https://www.candp.marines.mil/Concepts/ ... perations/

EABO
Following publication of the LOCE concept described above, the CNO and CMC directed development of an official naval concept for Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO). That action resulted in development of a classified white paper formally endorsed by the Commander Fleet Forces Command and the Commander Pacific Fleet. A Navy-Marine Corps concept development team is expanding the white paper into a full, classified concept with submission to CNO and CMC anticipated in the spring of 2018. Once the classified concept is approved, an unclassified version will follow.

As described in the LOCE concept, EABO seek to further distribute lethality by providing land-based options for increasing the number of sensors and shooters beyond the upper limit imposed by the quantity of seagoing platforms available. The EABO concept espouses employing mobile, relatively low-cost capabilities in austere, temporary locations forward as integral elements of fleet/JFMCC operations. Expeditionary advanced base operations may be employed to position naval ISR assets, future coastal defense cruise missiles (CDCM), anti-air missiles (to counter cruise and ballistic missiles as well as aircraft), and forward arming and refueling points (FARPs) and other expedient expeditionary operating sites for aircraft such as the F-35, critical munitions reloading teams for ships and submarines,or to provide expeditionary basing for surface screening/scouting platforms, all of which serve to increase friendly sensor and shooter capacity while complicating adversary targeting. They may also control, or at least outpost, key maritime terrain to improve the security of sea lines of communications (SLOCs) and chokepoints or deny their use to the enemy, and exploit and enhance the natural barriers formed by island chains.

The EABO concept provides the opportunity to “turn the sea denial table” on potential adversaries and deter fait accompli actions. This can be done in a pre-crisis manner through security cooperation activities with our partners and allies. This could include pre-staging equipment and supplies in key regions, conducting EABO exercises, and perhaps even creating more persistently forward postured— but continuously mobile—forces task-organized for EABO. This would give the fleet commander/ JFMCC sea denial assets persistently postured in potentially disputed areas in order to deter aggression. In the event of crises, EABO can be employed in support of task forces maneuvering into the area to seize the initiative. To fully leverage the EABO initiative, the Navy and Marine Corps must pursue the ability to network sea-based and landbased sensors and shooters. Additionally, the Navy should determine what current or planned sensors and weapons can be fielded in an expeditionary variant while the Marine Corps should determine what changes to existing Marine systems can enhance their utility in a sea denial or sea control fight. Furthermore, new initiatives, such as fielding a common anti-ship missile that can be launched from existing surface combatants, submarines, manned (and perhaps unmanned) aircraft, and mobile ground launchers, should be explored.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2019, 20:00
by steve2267
Maybe I've been viewing all the Chinese island building in the Southeast Asian Sea (or Indochina Sea or South Sea) through the wrong lense.

Maybe I should be thankful that the PRC has been building all these advanced FOB's (EABO's ?) for the USMC.

Well, I suppose the Chinese will be really pissed (can't say right pissed, since there's nothing right about it) when the USMC takeover all those bases with runways and facilities and all...

With Killer Bees + HIMARs + C-130J / KC-130J, maybe even toss in some older P-3 Orions or maybe even P-8 Pegasuses, it will be the USMC pushing the PLAN back...

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 26 Mar 2019, 16:49
by spazsinbad
BASIC INSTINCTS? (part of thread title) Here is how the USMC exercise today for those 'island chains' - even a P-8 stars.
Pacific Blitz Tests How Navy, Marines Could Fight the Next Island Campaign [LONG POST - Details not here]
26 Mar 2019 Gidget Fuentes

"As amphibious exercise Pacific Blitz 2019 wraps up today, senior commanders already are reviewing after-action lessons and thinking ahead to future exercises that will help develop, train and prepare forces for fights on the move and close to shore.

The exercise, which began March 12 off Southern California, is the result of combining the logistics exercise Pacific Horizon and amphibious exercise Dawn Blitz “to try to start getting at this complicated concept,” Vice Adm. John Alexander, the U.S. 3rd Fleet commander in San Diego, said of the Marine Corps’ Littoral Operations in a Contested Environment (LOCE) concept that involves moving small groups of Marines around on shore or between islands. “It’s a different way of doing business.”

...Officials say that naval amphibious forces will face and fight capable near-peer adversaries in the future, and they must maintain “sea control” so forces can operate and maneuver across the vast battlespace. One likely battleground is Indo-Pacific region that’s home to many islands, U.S. allies and trading partners, and potential threats from China and Russia.... [then lots of detail]

...The exercise addressed the CNO’s latest strategy – A Design for Maintaining Maritime Superiority 2.0 – for a more lethal, agile and capable future force. Goals include maturing the distributed maritime operations concept, posturing logistics capabilities ashore and at sea that support and sustain the fleet globally, and creating resilient ways to refuel, rearm, resupply and repair.

So Marines and naval expeditionary forces were spread across simulated “islands” and expeditionary advanced bases or advanced naval bases, all designed to help facilitate sea control. “It’s meant to be dynamic because it’s meant to keep us untargeted in a contested environment,” said Alexander. But that also make logistics and resupply more challenging.

“We are optimized to move it in big quantities” of fuel supplies, he said. “Now we’re having to figure out how do we move it in smaller quantities but utilize it in a fashion that … is dynamic, quickly moveable and untargetable.” It’s not easy relocating equipment, such as smaller fuel bladders and pumps, to support maneuvering, distributed forces at sea and ashore.

The logistics of expeditionary advance base operations, such as resupply, refueling, medical care and aviation support, is relatively new to Marines. “If you’re going to put a transient base forward, an EAB, how do you get enough fuel there to operate aircraft for 72 to 96 hours, whatever it might be?” Osterman said. “It’s not quite as exciting as shooting missiles or stuff like that, but it’s one of those fundamental things that if we can’t get it right, we’re not going to be able to do the mission we’ve got to do.”...

...On San Clemente Island, NECC sailors loaded an exercise torpedo on a P-8 Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft that “was in an expeditionary role, which was kind of cool,” Alexander said. “But what we also saw was a big footprint for loading gear for that, and we need to get technologies that can do that on a smaller footprint.” Marines and sailors set up a joint forward arming and refueling point, where aircraft brought in fuel and crews filled fuel bladders that, in turn, refueled fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft.

At sea, Marines on aviation logistics ship Curtiss fixed and maintained aircraft. “We’re not actually going to land aircraft on there and work on them, but they are actually fixing components while they’re at sea,” Osterman said, “and we’re going to provide the supply.”…"

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/03/26/pacifi ... d-campaign

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2019, 06:11
by spazsinbad
F-35B Allowed Essex ARG to Flex New Blue-Water Capabilities in Absence of Carrier Nearby [best read at URL]
16 Apr 2019 Megan Eckstein

"ARLINGTON, Virginia – The F-35B Joint Strike Fighter is not only changing the way Marine forces conduct their missions, it is also changing the way the amphibious navy can do its work in the absence of an aircraft carrier, leaders from the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit and Essex Amphibious Ready Group said.

The Essex ARG and 13th MEU were the first to deploy from the United States with the F-35B, and they operated in the Pacific and Middle East from mid-July until their March 1 return home to San Diego. The deployment not only generated lessons learned on how to operate and sustain the F-35B jets as part of the Marine unit and in support of its objectives ashore, but also how to use the new jet to support blue-water Navy missions at sea, 13th MEU Commanding Officer Col. Chandler Nelms and Amphibious Squadron 1 Operations Officer Lt. Cmdr. David Mahoney told the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies on April 12.

“We’re definitely changing the way amphibs are employed, especially on the blue side – we’re no longer just the trucks that carry Marines that we used to be,” Mahoney said. “There was no carrier in 5th Fleet, for example, so a lot of the CSG-like duties we started taking over just because we had to.”

Though Mahoney made clear the ARG/MEU team could never replace a carrier air wing, he said “the ARG is now becoming almost like a mini CSG, where as part of the warfare concept we were executing many of those duties that would normally reserve to a CVN. There was no CVN except for the last couple of weeks while we were in theater (in 5th Fleet), so we were doing that traditional role on USS Essex (LHD-2) and working with other ships too. The ARG/MEU team is definitely in high demand to fill those roles as the Navy is spreading out further and further around the globe,” he said, noting that the deployed aircraft carrier, USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) was at the time focused on operations in Europe and north of the Arctic Circle rather than deploying to the Middle East as many had expected it would.

“We are being treated as a CSG in a lot of respects: you can see that layered defense, so we were always bringing in destroyers to help work with us – East and West Coast, wherever they came from, they were integrating with the team,” the operations officer continued....

…[Other assets] ...the F-35Bs of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 211 to maintain air control and situational awareness in a way that an ARG/MEU couldn’t have done previously with the legacy AV-8B Harrier strike airplanes. “We self-supported ourselves on this deployment with combat air patrols,” Nelms said, and the F-35Bs – while not an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) plane – could also use their sensors to provide “non-traditional ISR) for the ARG/MEU team.... [more details]

...Though the Navy still has much left to learn, Mahoney said he’s sure the presence of the F-35B in an ARG/MEU will change the way the group is tasked by fleet commanders going forward.

“It definitely starts changing the thinking status. A lot of times amphibs are the guys who just haul Marines, kick them out, and if they need help they need to bring in some other offensive or defensive capability; whereas this is one of the first times we can really have that option to just reach out and touch somebody, whether that’s supporting the colonel and the Marines ashore or as we fight to get into the fight if that’s ever called upon – the F-35 gives us that option to get there because we may not have control of the seas and that’s definitely an option, “Mahoney said. “We’re not a carrier air wing, of course, but who knows where the carrier’s going to be, and this definitely gives us a much stronger option than we had in the past. We’ve already started changing the mindset of how we employ an ARG, and an LHD specifically, because the 35 gives us a lot more options than we had.”

Nelms and Mahoney said the deployment was notable for many other reasons. The deployment was extended by a month, keeping the sailors and Marines out for 234 days. They had a packed schedule on the transit through the Pacific, working with many partners big and small. The ARG/MEU parked in the Arabian Sea for two weeks to conduct strikes in Afghanistan – the first-ever combat strikes by the F-35 – and then spent more than 50 days flying more than 100 combat sorties over Syria, for a total of more than 1,200 combat hours in support of Operation Inherent Resolve alone. Anchorage sailed as far as Rota, Spain – an unusual location for a West Coast ship to end up, Nelms and Mahoney said. Both the Navy and Marines brought 3D printers to begin learning lessons about printing small plastic parts at sea, as a first step forwards eventually being able to print more complex metal parts. And the aircraft maintained an average readiness rate of 70 percent, with the F-35Bs maintaining a 75-percent readiness rate."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/04/16/f-35b- ... ier-nearby

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 24 Apr 2019, 03:17
by spazsinbad
Marines Folding F-35B into New Pacific Island-Hopping Concept
23 Apr 2019 Megan Eckstein

"ARLINGTON, Va. – The Marine Corps is learning how to incorporate its new F-35B Joint Strike Fighter jets into its island-hopping concept of Expeditionary Advance Base Operations, with the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit rehearsing this concept recently in the Pacific.

The Japan-based MEU was the first to operate with the new F-35B, though its experience with the jet has been quite different than that of the 13th MEU and Essex Amphibious Ready Group, which were the first to deploy with the F-35B from the United States and the first to conduct an operational air strike with the Joint Strike Fighter.

The 31st MEU, unique in being the only forward-deployed amphibious group, has been focused on integrating the new jet into its crisis-response and self-defense missions and showing off the new plane to Pacific allies and partners, MEU Commanding Officer Col. Robert Brodie said today at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. If a conflict were to emerge in the Pacific, 31st MEU would likely be among the first on the scene and would likely use its island-seizing EABO concept – so, figuring out how to conduct this mission with the new airplane was the focus of a recent exercise on a small Japanese island, Brodie said.

On Ie Shima, off Okinawa, 31st MEU conducted a standard raid and seizure: a recon team jumped in to pave the way for a raid force being flown in to seize the island. Once the island was secured, CH-53E heavy-lift helicopters flew in fuel bladders and ordnance to conduct a forward arming and refueling point (FARP) operation with the F-35Bs.

“We were actually able to set up a refueling point, and our 53s were taking the gas from a bladder and filling up F-35s, and then the F-35s were going and flying missions,” Brodie said. “That’s kind of the concept we rehearsed there. And the key to this is speed: we did not rush through it because we wanted to be very deliberate and we’re in a learning phase, but I think you could do these types of things relatively quickly if you had the right ground.”

Brodie said the Marines could do this type of operation with either the CH-53E or the MV-22B Osprey, but the MEU has found the helicopter works best….

...The Marines lease the western side of Ie Shima Training Facility and have built in a replica amphibious assault ship deck – which is separate from the runway where the FARP mission was taking place – so they could simulate the ship-to-shore missions for the helicopters as they supported the movement of fuel, weapons and other supplies to the island that was seized. Brodie noted “there’s immense utility in being able to just hold ground,” where the Marines could bring people, logistics, radars and more ashore by air or by surface connector...."

Photo: "An F-35B Lightning II fighter aircraft with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 lands at Ie Shima Training Facility during simulated Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations, March 14, 2019. Marines with the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit are conducting simulated EABO in a series of dynamic training events to refine their ability to plan, rehearse and complete a variety of missions. During EABO, the 31st MEU partnered with the 3rd Marine Division, 3rd Marine Logistics Group and 1st Marine Aircraft Wing, and airmen with the U.S. Air Force 353rd Special Operations Group, planning and executing training mission sets for military operations. US Marine Corps photo."
https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... 191467.jpg


Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/04/23/marine ... ng-concept

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2019, 09:45
by spazsinbad
USS America, USS New Orleans to Forward Deploy to Japan; USS Stethem, USS Wasp to Return to U.S.
26 Apr 2019 USN PR

"SASEBO, Japan — The Navy announced that the amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) and landing platform dock USS New Orleans (LPD 18) will become part of the U.S. 7th Fleet forward-deployed forces in Sasebo, Japan, the commander, Naval Forces Japan Public Affairs, said in a release and the amphibious assault ship USS Wasp (LHD 1) will shift its homeport to Norfolk, Virginia, to undergo scheduled maintenance...."

Source: http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/201 ... Photo.html

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 30 Apr 2019, 23:16
by talkitron
Berger: Marine Corps May Have to Shrink to Afford Modernization, Readiness Goals

“Our endstate is that all amphibious ships have the capability to downlink and share F-35 data. The Navy has already installed on several amphibious ships the new capstone Ship Self Defense System (SSDS), which brings the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) and Link-16 to the platform. Five Landing Helicopter Docks (LHDs) are scheduled for similar upgrades over the next five years. This system provides a critical combat capability which will integrate with F-35s over Link-16,” he wrote.
“We have fielded a system on select amphibious ships that enables post-flight data from the F-35 to be disseminated to warfighters and analysts at a lower classification level. We have also begun to install Marine Corps Common Aviation Command and Control System (CAC2S) on amphibious ships. This is a new capability being used by USMC tactical air defense controllers and air control electronics operators. CAC2S enables aircraft to become a forward sensor for the command elements embarked on Marine Expeditionary Units/Amphibious Ready Groups (MEUs/ARGs), providing greater situational awareness and faster decision making.”


https://news.usni.org/2019/04/30/berger ... ness-goals

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2019, 17:58
by steve2267
I posted this in the six-pack thread... moving it here.

I have been watching with some consternation over the past decade at the Chinese slowly building islands all around the Southeast Asia Sea, the Spratley Islands etc. The Obama administration seemed to have a rather tepid response to this militarization of the area.

But, have I gotten it all wrong? Has the USMC been quietly, gleefully applauding the Chinese for building all these bases for the Marine Corps? Seems like they are all ready made bases for the taking... operate from for 48 hours, then skip town. Or have I got it all wrong?

(On other hand... if the Chinese have rigged every one of those man made islands to blow at the push of the button... maybe not such a great place to put your expensive Killer Bees, Ospreys and CH-53E/K's...)

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2019, 05:41
by spazsinbad
Marines prep to hit the beach (but need more ships from the Navy)
06 May 2019 Shawn Snow

"WASHINGTON — In March, nearly ten thousand Marines and sailors waged a campaign in the vast Pacific Ocean against a near-peer competitor, putting to test emerging technologies and fighting concepts aimed at sea control. The Pacific Blitz exercise tackled naval integration and getting “back to our roots” following years of counterinsurgency operations in the Middle East, Lt. Gen. Joseph L. Osterman, the commander of the California-based I Marine Expeditionary Force, told Marine Corps Times in an interview.

Studying a future sea battle, Marines realize that they might be ordered to seize islands and beachheads, a traditional mission for the amphibious force. But a maintenance backlog and procurement delays for amphibious ships and connectors threaten to hamper the Corps’ ability to fight at sea and prepare itself to confront a rising China....

...The lack of available amphibs impairs the Corps’ ability to train a force to relearn and experience naval operations and reignites an age-old complaint about adequate Navy support to the Marines’ amphibious mission. There’s also the ongoing debate between military officials and defense experts about how high casualties might rise from a seaborne invasion of a contested beachhead....

...After 17 years of fighting in the Middle East and Afghanistan, critics worry that the Corps lost touch with its sea roots and is in the process of relearning its primary amphibious mission, a key reason why the Marines need more ships to retool those skills....

...The recent Pacific Blitz exercise, which honed skills for sea control against a near-peer foe, involved four Navy ships and roughly 5,000 Marines. Lt. Gen. Osterman says he’d like to get in the habit of doing these MEF-level exercises at least once every year. “It’s a shift from what we’ve been used to doing in terms of counterterrorism,” Osterman said.

The exercise afforded the Corps the chance to see how vulnerable the service is against a near-peer foe and how the force “can contribute to the sea control fight,” Osterman said. To Marines, exercises like Pacific Blitz don’t merely help update potential war plans but are essential to teaching personnel how to fight and survive in 21st combat.

That likely could mean commanders relearning the importance of the Corps’ basic block of combat power, the infantry squad, and devolving its management down to lower levels of leadership. There could be “a platoon-sized element on an island somewhere and they got to have this savvy ability to be able to make some decisions on their own,” Osterman said....

...“We are looking at things, like, how do we fold in the littoral combat ship? How do we, with the advancement in connectors … how does that work for us in terms of intra-island maneuver?” Osterman said...."

Source: https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... -the-navy/

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 13:50
by spazsinbad
steve2267 wrote:I posted this in the six-pack thread... moving it here.

I have been watching with some consternation over the past decade at the Chinese slowly building islands all around the Southeast Asia Sea, the Spratley Islands etc. The Obama administration seemed to have a rather tepid response to this militarization of the area.

But, have I gotten it all wrong? Has the USMC been quietly, gleefully applauding the Chinese for building all these bases for the Marine Corps? Seems like they are all ready made bases for the taking... operate from for 48 hours, then skip town. Or have I got it all wrong?

(On other hand... if the Chinese have rigged every one of those man made islands to blow at the push of the button... maybe not such a great place to put your expensive Killer Bees, Ospreys and CH-53E/K's...)

Perhaps this article will ease your concerns 'O concerned One StevenOfWondrousness the THIRD' Overlord 1st Island Chain.

Some more recent Hubba-hubba: https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... ships.html
Marines: FVL Intriguing, BUT CH-53K Is Essential
09 May 2019 Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

"...Supplying Island Outposts
So why does the Marine Corps need heavy lift so badly? “We have a requirement that is difficult,” Rudder, the deputy commandant for aviation, told the Sea-Air-Space conference, “because of the weight required for today’s battlefield and the logistics required for distributed operations.”....

Distributed operations, however, is an issue for the future — albeit a future the Marines want to reach as fast as possible. In Afghanistan and Iraq, US forces built up an extensive infrastructure of large, well-supplied Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) to provide both efficient logistics and protection against insurgents: Car bombs could blow up the gate, unguided rockets and mortar shells could harass the troops inside, but the enemy lacked the firepower to wipe out such a large outpost. But against a high-tech, heavily-armed nation-state like Russia or China, with access to spy satellites, scout drones, and long-range, precision-guided missiles, a big base is just a big target: It’s not a sanctuary, it’s a deathtrap.

That’s why the Marines are all keen on “distributing” their forces across the future battlefield. (The Army and Navy have their own versions of this idea). Instead of concentrating on big bases, units will split up and take cover to avoid a precision-guided barrage. But there’s a catch. By giving up the easily targeted infrastructure, you also give up its logistical efficiency: How do you resupply small units scattered across the war zone?

That’s particularly challenging for the Marines, because their concept for future combat, Expeditionary Advance Base Operations (EABO), calls for establishing small outposts on scattered islands. Each base would have batteries of long-range missiles to shoot down enemy aircraft, intercept enemy missiles attacking US forces, and sink enemy ships. Some bases would have landing areas and, more important, repair, refueling, and rearming facilities for small contingents of F-35B jump jets.

The idea is for each island to extend a “no-go zone” well out to sea, forcing the enemy to take time either destroying the outpost or going around. Collectively, the islands would act like an anvil, with Navy and Air Force forces forming the highly mobile hammer.

(This island-outpost approach would be useful defending the Nordic and Baltic countries from Russian aggression, but it’s most relevant to a Pacific war with China. The use of land bases to extend control over the sea and air is a key component of both the Russo-Chinese tactic of Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) and the Army-led Multi-Domain Operations concept).

Operating from islands rules out some options like the robotic supply trucks the Army is developing. The Navy-Marine Corps team has decades of experience supplying land forces from the sea, but an enemy with long-range precision missiles could sink supply ships that just hung around offshore, the way the Navy did at Iwo Jima. Keeping the supply ships on the move and well out at sea requires supplies to make the final leg of their journey by air....

...“We’d like to have the option of not being wedded to large airbases [with] 8,000, 9,000, 10,000-foot runways,” Rudder said. “That’s what the F-35 does for us, we can go ashore with a 1,000 or 3,000 foot runway, or less, and be able to rearm, reload, and get back up into the fight. We’d like the same conditions for all of our assets coming off the ship.”"

Graphic Map: "Land-based missiles deployed at “Expeditionary Advance Bases” could form a virtual wall against Chinese aggression (CSBA graphic)" https://sites.breakingmedia.com/uploads ... 24x610.png


Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2019/05/mar ... essential/

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 10 May 2019, 22:13
by blain
spazsinbad wrote:
steve2267 wrote:I posted this in the six-pack thread... moving it here.

I have been watching with some consternation over the past decade at the Chinese slowly building islands all around the Southeast Asia Sea, the Spratley Islands etc. The Obama administration seemed to have a rather tepid response to this militarization of the area.

But, have I gotten it all wrong? Has the USMC been quietly, gleefully applauding the Chinese for building all these bases for the Marine Corps? Seems like they are all ready made bases for the taking... operate from for 48 hours, then skip town. Or have I got it all wrong?

(On other hand... if the Chinese have rigged every one of those man made islands to blow at the push of the button... maybe not such a great place to put your expensive Killer Bees, Ospreys and CH-53E/K's...)

Perhaps this article will ease your concerns 'O concerned One StevenOfWondrousness the THIRD' Overlord 1st Island Chain.

Some more recent Hubba-hubba: https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... ships.html
Marines: FVL Intriguing, BUT CH-53K Is Essential
09 May 2019 Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.

"...Supplying Island Outposts
So why does the Marine Corps need heavy lift so badly? “We have a requirement that is difficult,” Rudder, the deputy commandant for aviation, told the Sea-Air-Space conference, “because of the weight required for today’s battlefield and the logistics required for distributed operations.”....

Distributed operations, however, is an issue for the future — albeit a future the Marines want to reach as fast as possible. In Afghanistan and Iraq, US forces built up an extensive infrastructure of large, well-supplied Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) to provide both efficient logistics and protection against insurgents: Car bombs could blow up the gate, unguided rockets and mortar shells could harass the troops inside, but the enemy lacked the firepower to wipe out such a large outpost. But against a high-tech, heavily-armed nation-state like Russia or China, with access to spy satellites, scout drones, and long-range, precision-guided missiles, a big base is just a big target: It’s not a sanctuary, it’s a deathtrap.

That’s why the Marines are all keen on “distributing” their forces across the future battlefield. (The Army and Navy have their own versions of this idea). Instead of concentrating on big bases, units will split up and take cover to avoid a precision-guided barrage. But there’s a catch. By giving up the easily targeted infrastructure, you also give up its logistical efficiency: How do you resupply small units scattered across the war zone?

That’s particularly challenging for the Marines, because their concept for future combat, Expeditionary Advance Base Operations (EABO), calls for establishing small outposts on scattered islands. Each base would have batteries of long-range missiles to shoot down enemy aircraft, intercept enemy missiles attacking US forces, and sink enemy ships. Some bases would have landing areas and, more important, repair, refueling, and rearming facilities for small contingents of F-35B jump jets.

The idea is for each island to extend a “no-go zone” well out to sea, forcing the enemy to take time either destroying the outpost or going around. Collectively, the islands would act like an anvil, with Navy and Air Force forces forming the highly mobile hammer.

(This island-outpost approach would be useful defending the Nordic and Baltic countries from Russian aggression, but it’s most relevant to a Pacific war with China. The use of land bases to extend control over the sea and air is a key component of both the Russo-Chinese tactic of Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) and the Army-led Multi-Domain Operations concept).

Operating from islands rules out some options like the robotic supply trucks the Army is developing. The Navy-Marine Corps team has decades of experience supplying land forces from the sea, but an enemy with long-range precision missiles could sink supply ships that just hung around offshore, the way the Navy did at Iwo Jima. Keeping the supply ships on the move and well out at sea requires supplies to make the final leg of their journey by air....

...“We’d like to have the option of not being wedded to large airbases [with] 8,000, 9,000, 10,000-foot runways,” Rudder said. “That’s what the F-35 does for us, we can go ashore with a 1,000 or 3,000 foot runway, or less, and be able to rearm, reload, and get back up into the fight. We’d like the same conditions for all of our assets coming off the ship.”"

Graphic Map: "Land-based missiles deployed at “Expeditionary Advance Bases” could form a virtual wall against Chinese aggression (CSBA graphic)" https://sites.breakingmedia.com/uploads ... 24x610.png


Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2019/05/mar ... essential/


A lot depends on what happens to the battle over ISR and overhead systems. But Chinese have a good idea of potential austere runways in the first island chain and will preempt by putting those runways out of commission. If they had a limited supply of TBMs or cruise missiles then maybe it would work.

But you have go back to why do you want F-35s close to enemy lines or behind enemy lines for that matter. Unless the Chinese are blind or distracted with regard to the battle space then striking at the mainland from those locations will be short lived. Maybe providing DCA for Marines on the ground somewhere or the ROC? If that's the case them you are going to need a lot of F-35s, a lot of fuel, and a lot of locations which you will need to defend.

Truck mounted ASCMs make a lot of sense. If the US could get them into the ROC the Chinese would be hard press to neutralize them in built up areas or in rural areas. As long as they can still be cued through a network and the PLA is not on the island then it could have a significant impact.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 14 May 2019, 04:19
by spazsinbad
Navy Wants to Invest In Amphibious Ship Upgrades, But Funding, Timing Still Unclear
13 May 2019 Megan Eckstein

"NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. – The Navy is committed to upgrading its amphibious ships to support the Navy and Marines’ new way of operating and to leverage the power of the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter, but it’s still unclear when dollars will start flowing to pay for these upgrades to communications and command and control systems.

Rear Adm. Jim Kilby, the Navy’s director of warfare integration, said last week that service leaders are looking at the command and control upgrades and logistics enablers to allow the Navy/Marine Corps team to conduct Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO) and Expeditionary Advance Base Operations (EABO), the two services’ concepts to address high-end warfare in the open ocean and the littorals. However, he acknowledged, those investments must be made while balancing other modernization efforts, rebuilding readiness and growing the force.

Amphibious ships, “in conjunction with things like the Joint Strike Fighter, are really changing the way we view those assets and how they would help us in this great power competition,” Kilby said during a panel on expeditionary warfare at the Navy League’s annual Sea Air Space conference last week. “We’ve been focused for a long time on power projection ashore. And now there’s a balance that we have to think about in great power competition of sea control and power projection,” he said, adding that the Navy and Maries are looking at investments in things like long-range precision weapons so that Marines ashore can hold at risk enemy targets at sea….

[ Marine Corps Gets Long-Range Missile to Take Out Enemy Ships 09 May 2019 https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... ships.html ]

...Despite the general acknowledgement that DMO and EABO are moving the services in the right direction, it is unclear when more money will start flowing for modernization and upgrades to support these concepts. The Marine Corps is trying to field a long-range anti-ship missile as fast as possible and is working with Raytheon to integrate the Naval Strike Missile with its existing infrastructure. A long list of remaining spending needs, though, are “a high priority,” Kilby said, but “I can’t answer that specifically now” as to when those spending items will be funded....

...At the top of the list, though, is boosting the command and control capabilities of the amphibious assault ships to best leverage the massive amount of data the F-35B will soak up as it flies its missions. In particular, the Wasp-class LHDs cannot take in all the data the jets are collecting and share them with Marines aboard and with other ships in the fleet – something the amphibious community wants to fix. “There’s a lot of threats that come from land, so working that connectivity between the [situational awareness] on the ground and also on the surface and in the air is an important part, we think, of the F-35B and our connectivity to the Marine Corps’ command and control system,” DiGiovanni [Frank DiGiovanni, deputy director for expeditionary warfare on the chief of naval operations staff (OPNAV N95B)] said.

An amphibious warship capabilities evolution plan outlines the upgrades the Navy and Marine Corps want to invest in to boost connectivity, lethality and survivability of the amphibs to succeed in EABO and DMO in a high-end environment. Director of Expeditionary Warfare Maj. Gen. David Coffman last fall outlined his vision for amphib ship upgrades, which would include a mid-life overhaul period for amphibious assault ships — akin to the mid-life refueling and complex overhaul that aircraft carriers undergo — to give these ships the computers, the communications gear and more they need to fully leverage the F-35B.

“I don’t want to bring Marine Aviation down to third- and fourth-gen; I want to bring the rest of the Marine Air-Ground Task Force up to fifth-gen and exploit that technical expertise and have a fifth-gen MAGTF. The problem is, we’re having to embark a fifth-gen MAGTF on a third-gen ship, and we have to fix that. Time, now,” Coffman said in November 2018...."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/05/13/navy-w ... ll-unclear

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 31 Jul 2019, 20:28
by glennwhitten
The Chinese have developed a small trimaran that is equipped with tracks- it can sail out to a small atoll and crawl out on land. It is equipped with radar and sensors and SAM and anti ship missiles. Wallah- instant extension of their area denial defenses. I believe theirs is manned but no reason this could not be operated by AI.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2019, 05:50
by XanderCrews
blain wrote:
A lot depends on what happens to the battle over ISR and overhead systems. But Chinese have a good idea of potential austere runways in the first island chain and will preempt by putting those runways out of commission. If they had a limited supply of TBMs or cruise missiles then maybe it would work.



Image

we should just put all our eggs in these baskets.

But you have go back to why do you want F-35s close to enemy lines or behind enemy lines for that matter.


Because that's where the fight is.

Unless the Chinese are blind or distracted with regard to the battle space then striking at the mainland from those locations will be short lived. Maybe providing DCA for Marines on the ground somewhere or the ROC? If that's the case them you are going to need a lot of F-35s, a lot of fuel, and a lot of locations which you will need to defend.


War with China will probably result in "some" losses.


Truck mounted ASCMs make a lot of sense. If the US could get them into the ROC the Chinese would be hard press to neutralize them in built up areas or in rural areas. As long as they can still be cued through a network and the PLA is not on the island then it could have a significant impact.


Close coordination with combined arms (arty, Naval Gunfire, HIMARS) is a big part of this whole thing.

If you think of Marine Air as nothing more than flying artillery for the support of ground troops all of it makes a lot more sense. If you think of the f-35 as a giant Recon and communications node, then it makes even more sense and why the USMC wants them close by.

Re: Basic instincts: Resetting USMC core operational mindset

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2019, 20:51
by spazsinbad
Marines Eye Unmanned Systems To Keep F-35s Flying From Remote Bases
02 Aug 2019 Paul McLeary

"The Navy and Marine Corps are trying to buy new autonomous and unmanned systems more quickly for expeditionary ops, but as one general warned, “if I can’t sustain it, I’m hosed.”

THE PENTAGON: The Marines are testing unmanned platforms to quickly refuel and rearm F-35Bs it plans to operate out of remote, austere bases in the Pacific — part of an effort to be more nimble, and unpredictable, as the traditional American dominance at sea and in the air erodes. For years, the Corps has talked about flying its F-35Bs from hastily assembled bases on small islands and remote locations to avoid sophisticated surface-to-air missiles being developed by China and Russia. The basing effort would not only keep the stealthy planes tactically unpredictable, but also untether them from big deck ships that would be prime targets for hypersonic cruise missiles and other weapons in any future fight with an advanced enemy. This was a key driver behind the Marines deep commitment to the F-35B, which can do short takeoffs and vertical landings, as well as the rare vertical takeoff from a road or other flat surface.

One of the holdups to the plan has always been how to ensure the planes could get fuel, ammunition and parts out to these locations. “If I can’t sustain it, I’m hosed,” Maj. Gen. Mark Wise, deputy commander of Marine Corps Combat Development Command told a handful of reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday. Getting more fuel and ammo for those planes, quickly, would allow the Marines to “turn up the battlefield tempo at a much faster rate,” he said, which is critical in an area swarming with manned and unmanned platforms looking for American planes sitting on the ground for too long. That’s where the Advanced Naval Technology Exercise, (ANTX) comes in.[then lots of speculation]

...Much of what the officials described fits nicely within the framework outlined by new Marine Commandant Gen. David Berger in his recent Commandant’s Guidance. Berger called into question the usefulness of Marines continuing to get to the fight in large, slow and increasingly vulnerable ships operating without support from unmanned platforms that can warn them and help protect them from adversary movements.

“It would be illogical to continue to concentrate our forces on a few large ships,” he wrote. “The adversary will quickly recognize that striking while concentrated (aboard ship) is the preferred option. We need to change this calculus with a new fleet design of smaller, more lethal, and more risk-worthy platforms.” Geurts and Wise said their exercise was in keeping with this new direction. “What he’s doing is formalizing a lot of the things we’ve been working on,” Wise said, while laying out “how we are going to focus our efforts on where we’re going.”

Michael Stewart, the Navy’s deputy director of integrated warfare, added that the “new commandant’s guidance to me is just breathtaking in terms of how it talks about the naval — not Navy and Marine Corps — but naval forces, and the recognition that to solve the problems we’re up against, we have to be a naval force, and we have to be linked at the hip.”

The Lejune ANTX will be followed by another assessment later this month in Newport, R.I., that will bring in another batch of technology focused on undersea operations."

Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2019/08/mar ... ote-bases/