The Answer is Always the Marine Corps, Now What Was the Question?

"With or without the LCS, when asked what capability is required to fight in the Littorals - the right answer will always be the Marine Corps."

I try to save all my email, and that is a quote from an email sent to me in early November 2008, before I was embarked on FREEDOM, from a Marine LtCol who insisted that is the most important lesson I would learn by riding on FREEDOM a few days. I thought of that quote when I read this article over at DoD Buzz discussing Chris Rawley's swarming boat scenario from earlier this morning.

Phil Ewing concludes implying the right answer to swarming threats might be the Marine Corps Cobra gunships. That suggests me that in 2011:

• The LCS is still a Powerpoint capability
• RW Squadrons need more articulate advocates
• Navy ships can never have enough guns, particularly on the bigger warships

The point is valid though. Of the three scenarios presented by Chris, none of them include a Marine Corps perspective. Back when the EFV was in its infancy, I distinctly remember suggestions the EFV and it's 30mm gun could blow up swarming boats as it moved from ship-to-shore. When I was at the EFV shop in San Diego earlier this year, I asked about that. When asked, the Marine SSgt looked at me and said (and I am quoting),

"The EFV is as fast as the LCS, shorter than a Boston Whaler, and surrounded in armor. Tell me how creative the Colonel is and I'll tell you what we can do."

So as I think about the question Chris proposed, I'm thinking that the price of 1 DDG-51 I'll take a LPD-17 with Romeos, Cobras, EFVs, and instead of LCACs or LCUs, I'll take CB-90s and the blue green team that makes this capability a blue/green/brown water nightmare for the enemy.

Crowd-sourcing Counter-swarm

You guys seem to have a good time on the anti-CV thread: tons of responses, many of them thoughtful and well informed, others... not so much. Here's another one. Discuss an ASUW scenario using three sets of roughly cost-equivalent -- a billion dollars and change more or less -- forces in the near future:

1) a single FLT II DDG with armed MH-60s
2) a pair of LCS with ASUW module (assuming the Griffin), MH-60 and 2 x armed Fire Scouts; and
3) a squadron (say 10) offshore patrol craft (use the River Class for consistency) with embarked (armed) Fire scouts.

The threat: a multi-access swarm of 15 inshore attack craft (mostly crew served weapons/RPGs) and 5 fast attack craft with modern-ish ASCMs (C-704). Assume no external support in this case other than embarked organic air. How would you defend against/defeat this threat using each of the given force structures? If you'd like, describe the scenario for both low sea states (1-2) and higher (4-5) in both open water or a straits transit. Go.

HQ-10 (aka Chinese RAM) for close in air defense

Back in 2008's Zhuhai airshow, a mysterious SAM called FL-3000N was shown and looked a lot like RIM-116 (aka RAM). You can see my commentary on this system at the bottom of my blog entry on Zhuhai 2008.

At the time, I thought it was more of an export project, since Zhuhai airshow tend to display those more prominently. I was also under the impression that PLAN was going the route of using new air defense guns as the next generation CIWS. It turned out with the recent Varyag photos, that they have decided to field both this new SAM (domestic designation is supposedly HQ-10) and what looks to be Type 730 (commonly found on most recent PLAN warships) on Varyag.

You can see them clearly on Varyag now that their tarp (at least 3 identified installations on Varyag) are finally uncovered.



As with many new weapon systems in PLAN, they are tested on the 892 test ship. We can basically identify two variants of HQ-10. The first one is installed in the front of the ship with 24 launch tubes. You can see it clearly with the first 2 pictures. The second is installed on a platform on top of the helipad of the ship with 18 launch tubes. You can see it clearly with the last 2 pictures taken about 3 weeks apart. Now, it seems like the one in the back is the one installed on Varyag if we count up the number of launch tubes. It also seems like there is a storage compartment beneath the platform it was installed on, which would indicate that it is storing missiles for automatic reload. The one in the front is unlikely to require deck penetration, since it is installed directly on the deck of 892. I don't think they would do the extra work of modifying the front section of 892 just for testing this out. So, that would tell me that the version in front is used for installations that do not allow for deck space below and the version at back is used for installations that do allow for one level of penetration. It also would explain why the version in front carries 24 launch tubes instead of 18.

Somalia Pirates Targets India

Somali pirates have raised the ante for operating ships operating with crews that have nationalized citizens of India.

India has been cleaning up territorial waters and piracy operating in their EEZ with a great deal of success lately, and after several successful actions going back to February, India has apparently pissed off some of the pirates a great deal.

This is the latest incident:

Somalia pirates said on Saturday they would keep any Indian nationals from freed ships as hostages until fellow pirates held by India are set free.

Somali pirates, who make millions of dollars ransoming ships hijacked as far south as the Seychelles and eastwards towards India, on Friday released MT Asphalt Venture, but held some of its Indian crew.

"We are holding eight of Asphalt Venture crew. It was a joint understanding among us not to release any Indian citizens," a pirate who gave his name as Abdi told Reuters from pirate stronghold Harardhere.

"India hasn't only declared war against us, but also it has risked the lives of many hostages," he said.

Basically a multimillion dollar ransom was paid for the release of MT Asphalt Venture, and the ship was released, but the pirates kept 8 Indian nationals and are claiming they will keep all Indian nationals hostage until pirates that the Indian Navy and Coast Guard have captured are released. Pirates are no longer operating under normal rules, the spokesman in Harardhere is specifically using the word WAR, meaning they now feel they are in a state of war with India.

In the language of war, the pirates appear to be offering some sort of prisoner exchange.

Harardhere is the pirate stronghold in the south that many news sources have claimed direct financial agreements exist between pirates and Al Shabaab.

India has over 35,000 nationals who are employed globally as seaman on commercial ships flagged from a number of countries, and there are some very powerful maritime unions that work to protect the rights of those workers. We might also see some issues raised with insurance payments, because if a ransom payment is not valid for an Indian seaman, that could create a pretty big problem for piracy insurance premiums for ships with Indian nationals as crew members.

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds over the next few days.

Fire on the Flight Deck

The background story is at Defense Tech. My first thought is how quickly the fire fighting teams got multiple hoses on the fire quickly.

My second thought is how the Joint Strike Fighter would have been FUBAR once the engine goes out. It is hard to believe the US Navy is still going down the one engine path.

My final thought is what a good job the pilot did getting the Hornet back on deck. There really is lots of good stuff here. Well done to the Navy for releasing the video, even in what is ultimately bad news (an engine blows up on a flight deck) there is a lot of great stuff in this simple video.