Pardon me if I don’t have the confidence of others in the current Combat Development Process (CDP). Today’s CDP is not the former that gave the Marine Corps the Operational Maneuver from the Sea concept, the tiltrotor aircraft, the doctrine of maneuver warfare, the “crucible” at recruit training, long range fires, and other initiatives that made the Marine Corps more relevant and stronger. But it is the CDP that gave the Marine Corps Force Design 2030, Stand-in Forces, short range missiles that are inferior to other services’ capabilities, the reduced requirement for amphibious ships, the Landing Ship Medium (formerly LAW), corrupted wargames and other ill-advised initiatives that crippled the combined arms and global response capabilities of the Marine Corps. I have no doubt that most of the Marines and Sailors working inside the CDP could get the Marine Corps back on track if left unfettered to develop needed concepts, capabilities, and requirements vice being given concepts, capabilities, and requirements developed by zealots and sycophants behind closed doors and then directed to justify them.
Then Lt. Gen. Eric Smith destroyed the Marine Corps Combat Development Command created by General Al Gray when he divested training, education, and doctrine to a new Quantico organization, the Training and Education Command. The logic of this move escapes anyone who truly understands the combat development process, which depends on coordinating doctrine, organizational structure, training, material, leader development (PME), personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) when creating requirements documents. Sending three of those elements to a separate command was unwise and unnecessary. I must assume his decision was based on an ignorance of the process or simply hubris to create something different. Bottom line, the Corps cannot recover from the disaster of Force Design 2030 until it rebuilds the original MCCDC.
Apparently, someone was paying attention when I wrote this comment back on May 22d: "As a cost efficient, effective way of providing mass fires effects over time, it's hard to replace. Artillery is basically a mature ballistic launch, high velocity, min-post launch guidance, EW/DE resistant, high payload sUAS using a durable and reusable launcher if we look at it using a hyper-modern perspective.". Cheers, Compass Points ;)
The pure stupidity of the divesture of cannon artillery is more than this addled 77 year old brain can comprehend. If there will EVER be another time when assault must be made by Marines, they WILL need arty or they will die. Does anybody in the rank of 06 and above still remember our history ? I have not seen any active officers resigning over this idiotic move. Careerism, maybe?????
“each explosive launched drone weighs about 100 lbs. and explodes into 2,000 fragments”
How many fragments does an old fashion 81mm Mortar Platoon give you with 8 tubes and 2 rounds per tube in a fire for effect with an ECR of 35 meters per round? As an infantry leader I always knew I had an artillery/mortar suppression mission in my tactical bag of tricks. In other words, how to I keep the bad guys heads down and deny their freedom of movement while I maneuver. For a rifle company commander, the quickest way to suppress a target in a rapidly changing environment (IMO) is the battalion 81mm platoon. A good artillery FO attached to the rifle company can be almost as quick with a 155mm artillery mission but there may be other priorities.
Within the USMC T/O who gets the 100lb Explosive Launched Drone System? The MEF? The Wing? The MEB? The MEU? The Division? The Arty BN? Who employs and controls? A drone pilot? The FAC? The Arty FO? A BN CO? A Company CO? Yes, these are questions for the USMC Combat Development Command.
I have stated this before, drones have their place but they are a long way off before they become decisive. Between 2004 and 2017, the US made 409 drone strikes in Pakistan. The attacks peaked in 2010 with 122 strikes. We killed 2533 militants, 288 civilians, 275 unknown for a total of 3096. “The operations in Pakistan were closely tied to a related drone campaign in Afghanistan, along the same border area. These strikes have killed 3,798–5,059 militants and 161–473 civilians. Among the militant deaths are hundreds of high-level leaders of the Afghan Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban, the Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, and other organizations, with 70 Taliban leaders killed in one ten-day period of May 2017 alone.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Pakistan
What have we learned since 2004? In the Occupation, COIN, and Counter Terrorist environments of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, we can kill the bad guy’s leadership by the dozens. The bad news is it takes the US Military 15 to 20+ years to train an experience military leader; all the Taliban, Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, etc., has to do is take a deep breath and yell, “NEXT!”, to replace one of their leaders.
US Marine Corps does not need drones at the Strategic nor the Operational levels of war, especially in a Joint Military Service organization. The US Air Force can handle the Strategic drones and the US Army can develop and fund the ground based Operational level drones. The US Navy does need strategic sea based drones. When it comes to Naval Warfare I am not sure there is an Operational Level of War. Naval warfare is either strategic or tactical and the US Marine Corps needs to concentrate at the tactical level of warfare. The Marines need a low cost small "recon" drone that can be carried on a Squad Leaders belt or web gear. It needs to have a range of about 2000-3000 meters and it needs the capability to network in the Platoon Leader, the Company Commander and the battalion CP. Let’s concentrated on the tactical level drones and let the other services spend their time and money on the Operational Level and higher drones.
BAE Systems to restart US Army M777 howitzer structures production line
The restart will involve BAE Systems UK and US-based supply chain, and first deliveries are expected in 2025.
By TIM MARTIN
on January 04, 2024 at 12:12 PM
BTzpP9tIUAAyWsu
BAE Systems display a M777 lightweight howitzer at the biennial Defence and Security Equipment International tradeshow (BAE Systems PLC on X)
BELFAST — BAE Systems and the US Army have signed a $50 million contract for M777 lightweight howitzer “major structures” that will see the British manufacturer restart production of titanium parts for the towed artillery gun.
In a Thursday statement, BAE said that the restart will involve its UK and US-based supply chain, and first deliveries are expected in 2025.
US Army opens new 155mm artillery munitions plant in Texas
By Mike Stone
May 29, 20243:53 PM CDTUpdated 13 days ago
WASHINGTON, May 29 (Reuters) - The U.S. Army inaugurated its new Universal Artillery Projectile Lines facility in Mesquite, Texas, on Wednesday, marking a significant step in producing more 155mm artillery and modernizing domestic munitions production capabilities.
The plant, managed by General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems (GD.N), opens new tab, is part of a broader effort by the Army to update its industrial base and achieve a goal of making 155mm artillery shells at a rate of 100,000 a month.
Demand for 155mm artillery rounds has soared in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. But allies' supplies for their own defense have been run down as they have rushed shells to Kyiv, which fires
We all knew every weapon system would soon have a counter to it. Dumb bullets (launchers) are susceptible to CMR technology. Which is susceptible to this jamming. A use of the drone technology? Either CSMO or fire FPF.
Pardon me if I don’t have the confidence of others in the current Combat Development Process (CDP). Today’s CDP is not the former that gave the Marine Corps the Operational Maneuver from the Sea concept, the tiltrotor aircraft, the doctrine of maneuver warfare, the “crucible” at recruit training, long range fires, and other initiatives that made the Marine Corps more relevant and stronger. But it is the CDP that gave the Marine Corps Force Design 2030, Stand-in Forces, short range missiles that are inferior to other services’ capabilities, the reduced requirement for amphibious ships, the Landing Ship Medium (formerly LAW), corrupted wargames and other ill-advised initiatives that crippled the combined arms and global response capabilities of the Marine Corps. I have no doubt that most of the Marines and Sailors working inside the CDP could get the Marine Corps back on track if left unfettered to develop needed concepts, capabilities, and requirements vice being given concepts, capabilities, and requirements developed by zealots and sycophants behind closed doors and then directed to justify them.
Then Lt. Gen. Eric Smith destroyed the Marine Corps Combat Development Command created by General Al Gray when he divested training, education, and doctrine to a new Quantico organization, the Training and Education Command. The logic of this move escapes anyone who truly understands the combat development process, which depends on coordinating doctrine, organizational structure, training, material, leader development (PME), personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) when creating requirements documents. Sending three of those elements to a separate command was unwise and unnecessary. I must assume his decision was based on an ignorance of the process or simply hubris to create something different. Bottom line, the Corps cannot recover from the disaster of Force Design 2030 until it rebuilds the original MCCDC.
Apparently, someone was paying attention when I wrote this comment back on May 22d: "As a cost efficient, effective way of providing mass fires effects over time, it's hard to replace. Artillery is basically a mature ballistic launch, high velocity, min-post launch guidance, EW/DE resistant, high payload sUAS using a durable and reusable launcher if we look at it using a hyper-modern perspective.". Cheers, Compass Points ;)
It's also 365, 24/7, night/day, rain/shine, in any clime or place!
MCCP is here to remind those who ignore history!
The pure stupidity of the divesture of cannon artillery is more than this addled 77 year old brain can comprehend. If there will EVER be another time when assault must be made by Marines, they WILL need arty or they will die. Does anybody in the rank of 06 and above still remember our history ? I have not seen any active officers resigning over this idiotic move. Careerism, maybe?????
Not buying the drone excitement
“each explosive launched drone weighs about 100 lbs. and explodes into 2,000 fragments”
How many fragments does an old fashion 81mm Mortar Platoon give you with 8 tubes and 2 rounds per tube in a fire for effect with an ECR of 35 meters per round? As an infantry leader I always knew I had an artillery/mortar suppression mission in my tactical bag of tricks. In other words, how to I keep the bad guys heads down and deny their freedom of movement while I maneuver. For a rifle company commander, the quickest way to suppress a target in a rapidly changing environment (IMO) is the battalion 81mm platoon. A good artillery FO attached to the rifle company can be almost as quick with a 155mm artillery mission but there may be other priorities.
Within the USMC T/O who gets the 100lb Explosive Launched Drone System? The MEF? The Wing? The MEB? The MEU? The Division? The Arty BN? Who employs and controls? A drone pilot? The FAC? The Arty FO? A BN CO? A Company CO? Yes, these are questions for the USMC Combat Development Command.
I have stated this before, drones have their place but they are a long way off before they become decisive. Between 2004 and 2017, the US made 409 drone strikes in Pakistan. The attacks peaked in 2010 with 122 strikes. We killed 2533 militants, 288 civilians, 275 unknown for a total of 3096. “The operations in Pakistan were closely tied to a related drone campaign in Afghanistan, along the same border area. These strikes have killed 3,798–5,059 militants and 161–473 civilians. Among the militant deaths are hundreds of high-level leaders of the Afghan Taliban, the Pakistani Taliban, the Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, and other organizations, with 70 Taliban leaders killed in one ten-day period of May 2017 alone.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Pakistan
What have we learned since 2004? In the Occupation, COIN, and Counter Terrorist environments of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, we can kill the bad guy’s leadership by the dozens. The bad news is it takes the US Military 15 to 20+ years to train an experience military leader; all the Taliban, Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, etc., has to do is take a deep breath and yell, “NEXT!”, to replace one of their leaders.
US Marine Corps does not need drones at the Strategic nor the Operational levels of war, especially in a Joint Military Service organization. The US Air Force can handle the Strategic drones and the US Army can develop and fund the ground based Operational level drones. The US Navy does need strategic sea based drones. When it comes to Naval Warfare I am not sure there is an Operational Level of War. Naval warfare is either strategic or tactical and the US Marine Corps needs to concentrate at the tactical level of warfare. The Marines need a low cost small "recon" drone that can be carried on a Squad Leaders belt or web gear. It needs to have a range of about 2000-3000 meters and it needs the capability to network in the Platoon Leader, the Company Commander and the battalion CP. Let’s concentrated on the tactical level drones and let the other services spend their time and money on the Operational Level and higher drones.
BAE Systems to restart US Army M777 howitzer structures production line
The restart will involve BAE Systems UK and US-based supply chain, and first deliveries are expected in 2025.
By TIM MARTIN
on January 04, 2024 at 12:12 PM
BTzpP9tIUAAyWsu
BAE Systems display a M777 lightweight howitzer at the biennial Defence and Security Equipment International tradeshow (BAE Systems PLC on X)
BELFAST — BAE Systems and the US Army have signed a $50 million contract for M777 lightweight howitzer “major structures” that will see the British manufacturer restart production of titanium parts for the towed artillery gun.
In a Thursday statement, BAE said that the restart will involve its UK and US-based supply chain, and first deliveries are expected in 2025.
US Army opens new 155mm artillery munitions plant in Texas
By Mike Stone
May 29, 20243:53 PM CDTUpdated 13 days ago
WASHINGTON, May 29 (Reuters) - The U.S. Army inaugurated its new Universal Artillery Projectile Lines facility in Mesquite, Texas, on Wednesday, marking a significant step in producing more 155mm artillery and modernizing domestic munitions production capabilities.
The plant, managed by General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems (GD.N), opens new tab, is part of a broader effort by the Army to update its industrial base and achieve a goal of making 155mm artillery shells at a rate of 100,000 a month.
Demand for 155mm artillery rounds has soared in the wake of the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. But allies' supplies for their own defense have been run down as they have rushed shells to Kyiv, which fires
We all knew every weapon system would soon have a counter to it. Dumb bullets (launchers) are susceptible to CMR technology. Which is susceptible to this jamming. A use of the drone technology? Either CSMO or fire FPF.