I am very glad to hear the USMC saying it needs to address the same practical logistics issues brought up here on CP and elsewhere over the last 2 years, as seen in this comment from one of the articles in this post:
"["]Project Eagle will be heavily shaped by the concept of distributed aviation operations["], said Col. Derek Brannon, director of the Cunningham Group within the Deputy Commandant for Aviation."..."What distributed aviation operations drives us to, is looking at the hard questions of logistics, sustainment, resiliency, force protection.""..."Addressing the aviation role in contested logistics is critical, he said. And that's what DAO is driving us to do is to have those hard conversations about how are you going to actually sustain and execute anywhere around the world support the [MAGTF] and pull in the Joint Force and support the Joint Force?"".
-My $.02: I am a true advocate of the mantra that 'Ops Drives Logistics'...but logistical considerations are necessary to successful Operations. It is a fine line between "a great and difficult challenge, possibly without precedent" versus "cannot be done with current level of human achievement in the time frame required". I hope my friends on the "Proponent of FD (2030)" side of the house feel free to post of how blind and stuck in the past the USMC must be to admit an operational logistics deficiency in such practical matters despite being vetted in 'The Wargamingz'. Ian, Phil, Hammes, Dean, etc: Are you out there? (Preemptive note: Use of 'Campaign of Learning' is not allowed since we are speaking to Operational Capabilities available to COCOMs now. Otherwise, I could use 'Campaign of Learning' in 1863 to explain how I will eventually provide Carrier Borne Naval Air Forces to the Union Effort if we only divest of our current wooden hull vessels by the start of FY1865).
Regarding 30 mile range for V-22, once again the Republic was lied to by its Senior Civilian and Uniformed Military Leaders. Recently a photo of Marines from the 15TH MEU, who were stranded ashore while the Broken Boxer was awaiting rudder repair, portrayed Marines practicing ingress and egress from a static V22 positioned inside a circle drawn on the airfield. This is the 2024 version of Pre WWII US Forces training w non firing rifles made of wood. No worries next month is Military Gay Pride Month…the USAF Director of DEI has made funds available for celebration of deviant sex acts for all USAF bases.
Oddly enough, in 1979 at Mike Company 3/2, we practiced for a raid on the old Combat Town (a series of two story cinder block edifices) was all we had and no birds to even practice static ingress and egress with, soooo knowing the rough width and length of the CH-53 we made a floor plan of the helicopter in the dirt. We practiced the line ups and who was going where, etc with the Company Gunny providing non stop Robin Williams humor commentary. When we finally got the real thing and went straight from the LZ to LZ near Combat Town while not perfect the Marines at least knew where and how they were going. I am sure they thought the training in the dirt was chicken hobucky but they did it, and it paid off when the real lift became available to train with. It was a whatever it takes attitude of they and my CO Captain Ron Stevens that comes to mind as I read all the de ja vue all over again of the Osprey and their use of a static aircraft to train.
At some point those who have promulgated the FD nonsense of divest to invest need be held accountable. But in the meantime one can be sure the Marines on duty will continue to improvise, adapt and over come…the return of HMLA 269 surely is a step in the right direction.
The key to combat aircraft is availability. The long history of the MV-22 is one of limited availability and 30 years of readiness surprises. How it would hold up under weeks of high intensity combat is worrisome. The F-35 has had a similar tortured past concerning readiness and availability. We’ve got them and there are no other options.
The cut in Cobra squadrons was a bad decision. It remains inexplicable.
Tough times ahead for Marine Aviation as a greater burden will fall on them.
“The committee understands that current CMV-22 operations are limited to flights and missions that stay within 30 minutes of a suitable divert airfield,” the language from the subcommittee on seapower and projection forces reads.”…..what ever that means…..
I am very glad to hear the USMC saying it needs to address the same practical logistics issues brought up here on CP and elsewhere over the last 2 years, as seen in this comment from one of the articles in this post:
"["]Project Eagle will be heavily shaped by the concept of distributed aviation operations["], said Col. Derek Brannon, director of the Cunningham Group within the Deputy Commandant for Aviation."..."What distributed aviation operations drives us to, is looking at the hard questions of logistics, sustainment, resiliency, force protection.""..."Addressing the aviation role in contested logistics is critical, he said. And that's what DAO is driving us to do is to have those hard conversations about how are you going to actually sustain and execute anywhere around the world support the [MAGTF] and pull in the Joint Force and support the Joint Force?"".
(From https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2024/5/1/marine-corps-charting-aviation-path-to-2040. *Note: apologies for my edits in brackets; the source had grammar issues.)
-My $.02: I am a true advocate of the mantra that 'Ops Drives Logistics'...but logistical considerations are necessary to successful Operations. It is a fine line between "a great and difficult challenge, possibly without precedent" versus "cannot be done with current level of human achievement in the time frame required". I hope my friends on the "Proponent of FD (2030)" side of the house feel free to post of how blind and stuck in the past the USMC must be to admit an operational logistics deficiency in such practical matters despite being vetted in 'The Wargamingz'. Ian, Phil, Hammes, Dean, etc: Are you out there? (Preemptive note: Use of 'Campaign of Learning' is not allowed since we are speaking to Operational Capabilities available to COCOMs now. Otherwise, I could use 'Campaign of Learning' in 1863 to explain how I will eventually provide Carrier Borne Naval Air Forces to the Union Effort if we only divest of our current wooden hull vessels by the start of FY1865).
Regarding 30 mile range for V-22, once again the Republic was lied to by its Senior Civilian and Uniformed Military Leaders. Recently a photo of Marines from the 15TH MEU, who were stranded ashore while the Broken Boxer was awaiting rudder repair, portrayed Marines practicing ingress and egress from a static V22 positioned inside a circle drawn on the airfield. This is the 2024 version of Pre WWII US Forces training w non firing rifles made of wood. No worries next month is Military Gay Pride Month…the USAF Director of DEI has made funds available for celebration of deviant sex acts for all USAF bases.
I guess that's what they call diversity, equity and inclusiveness over readiness.
Oddly enough, in 1979 at Mike Company 3/2, we practiced for a raid on the old Combat Town (a series of two story cinder block edifices) was all we had and no birds to even practice static ingress and egress with, soooo knowing the rough width and length of the CH-53 we made a floor plan of the helicopter in the dirt. We practiced the line ups and who was going where, etc with the Company Gunny providing non stop Robin Williams humor commentary. When we finally got the real thing and went straight from the LZ to LZ near Combat Town while not perfect the Marines at least knew where and how they were going. I am sure they thought the training in the dirt was chicken hobucky but they did it, and it paid off when the real lift became available to train with. It was a whatever it takes attitude of they and my CO Captain Ron Stevens that comes to mind as I read all the de ja vue all over again of the Osprey and their use of a static aircraft to train.
At some point those who have promulgated the FD nonsense of divest to invest need be held accountable. But in the meantime one can be sure the Marines on duty will continue to improvise, adapt and over come…the return of HMLA 269 surely is a step in the right direction.
The key to combat aircraft is availability. The long history of the MV-22 is one of limited availability and 30 years of readiness surprises. How it would hold up under weeks of high intensity combat is worrisome. The F-35 has had a similar tortured past concerning readiness and availability. We’ve got them and there are no other options.
The cut in Cobra squadrons was a bad decision. It remains inexplicable.
Tough times ahead for Marine Aviation as a greater burden will fall on them.
I guess divest to invest is the same as penny wise, and a pound foolish.
“The committee understands that current CMV-22 operations are limited to flights and missions that stay within 30 minutes of a suitable divert airfield,” the language from the subcommittee on seapower and projection forces reads.”…..what ever that means…..