Alenia C-27J Wins Australian Airlift Contest

It’s been a long time coming but at last we know what the incomparable Caribou replacement will be.

And I heartily approve, believing from the word go that the Spartan would be the right choice.

But it still can’t do what the ‘bou ‘bou would do as the first aircrew to try and land it on an unprepared rising strip in the3 New Guinea Highlands will discover!

The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) chose the Alenia C-27J Spartan to replace a fleet of 14 DHC-4 Caribou STOL airlifters that have already been retired. The 10-aircraft deal will be conducted via the U.S. Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system, with L-3 acting as the prime contractor. Alenia and L-3 formed a partnership to sell the C-27J to the U.S. armed forces. The RAAF also evaluated the EADS CN-295 for the Air 8000 requirement.

The contract is worth about $1 billion, including support equipment and several years of training and logistics support. According to the Pentagon’s notice of potential sale, the aircraft will be equipped with a full U.S.-made electronic warfare suite. The notice added that the C-27Js will also help replace 12 C-130H airlifters that the RAAF plans to retire. The first C-27J will be delivered in 2015, with initial operating capability to follow by the end of 2016.

Alenia said that the aircraft will be new-build, thereby safeguarding the workforce in Italy. There had been speculation that the RAAF would be offered C-27Js being built for, or already flying with, the U.S. Air Force. That service decided last January to withdraw its fleet of C-27Js as a budget-cutting measure, having already received 13 of a planned total of 38. The decision has been challenged in Congress, and might be overturned.

May 11, 2012, 2:03 PM

Alenia C-27J Wins Australian Airlift Contest
Chris Pocock
Fri, 11 May 2012 15:10:00 GMT

The Generals Speak

In a rather astonishing prediction General Richards, Chief of the Defence Staff asserts that:

History Will Judge Afghan War Positively

I should have thought that this is would apply only if we win; by no means a foregone conclusion.

I must say that I am starting to have serious concerns about the geopolitical understanding of our senior military leaders who seem to be living in a colonial time warp.

Jolly good show chaps!

Welcome Back RCAF and RCN

 

Canada has just announced that it will restore the names Royal Canadian Navy, Royal Canadian Air force and Canadian Army.

The traditional names were originally dropped by Trudeau in a petulant display of anti royalty.  All true Canadians will rejoice at common sense breaking out.  No longer will the Canadian military create collective sniggering from others.

Modern militaries are now all joint services and as the Brits, Aussies, Kiwis and Yanks have shown traditional names in no way hamper this and indeed provide a source of inspiration and pride to veterans and serving members alike.

Welcome back Canada, we’ve missed you.

Your New Boots Sir

It has been revealed that the MoD spent £714.18 getting a pair of non-urgent boots to a soldier in Northern Ireland. 

See http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/%C2%A3700-bill-to-deliver-soldier-boots

A bit steep really.  Surely it would have been cheaper to fly a civil servant to Ulster and deliver them by hand!  At least the MoD can account for them unlike the £6Billion of unaccounted for kit!

I wonder what other gems of procurement are waiting to be exposed?

Military chiefs' clash with politicians over Libya and Afghanistan

This is a headline being trumpeted by the Telegraph.  Judging by some of the quotes in the article it’s a fairly mild clash.  Military rebellion isn’t just around the corner.  The PM can sleep comfortably in his bed without fear of a visit by the SAS or whoever is currently tasked with what the KGB used to refer to as “wet work”.

The substance of the “military chiefs” concerns is entirely reasonable but the public airing of them is not.  These disagreements should be resolved in private.  Making them public suggests that the service chiefs are entering the political arena, one they should and must keep clear of. 

Once serving generals become political our trust in their neutrality and objective reasoning withers. Unlike places like Libya we live in a democracy where war is an extension of policy by other means, not a way of  life.  The government makes the decisions and where necessary the military acts.  My country right or wrong – that is one of the facets of the Faustian Bargain entered into by all warriors. And besides generals, admirals and air marshals make great military leaders but usually lousy politicians (The Duke of Wellington notwithstanding).

Now before you dismiss me as a bleeding heart liberal I would remind you that I am one of the greatest supporters of the military having been a soldier and an airman too.  In fact my friends ridicule me for it. But I am an even fiercer democrat by instinct.

BBC News - Taliban resistance 'under-estimated' by Britain

 

 

This is a Western affliction for which the evidence is strong:

• The Romans at Teutoburg Forest in 9BC
• Britain and the settlers in the American War of Independence
• Britain and the Zulu in 1862
• Britain and the Afghans 1839-1842
• Britain and the Boers in 1880-1881
• Britain and the Japanese in 1940
• The US in Vietnam
• The Russians in Afghanistan
• The US and Britain in Afghanistan

(and there are probably lots of others)

Why is this so?  Do we really believe we are better than the opposition or do our intelligence people simply not know what’s going on?  And why, in the face of this sort of evidence, do we fail to learn?

As Sun Tzu said 2,500 years ago Know yourself and your enemy and you need not fear the results of a thousand battles.

Clearly we ain’t got a clue.  And they teach military history at Sandhurst!  Maybe the cadets can’t be bothered listening.

BBC News - Taliban resistance 'under-estimated' by Britain

What Happened in the KC-X Tanker Saga

I have blogged before about the long drawn-out saga of KC-X, the USAF program [sic] to replace the ageing fleet of KC-135 aerial refuelling tankers (see USAF selects Boeing for KC-X contract and Aussies Steal a March on the USAF ). 

Now the evergreen and delightful Popular Mechanics provides a chronology of the tortured process U.S. Air Force Tanker - Boeing Governent Contract - Popular Mechanics

Well worth reading to find out how not to do it, how Boeing eventually won and how one person can be a national hero or a right pain in the butt depending on where you stand.

A400M Production To Begin; Revised Deal Still Awaits Approval - Defense News

So it’s still not there yet. Is it too late?  Can we really afford it?  Why do we need it?  Will it do what is claimed?  Key questions indeed. 

Does the Government have misgivings too?  We should be told!

For the lowdown see: A400M Production To Begin; Revised Deal Still Awaits Approval - Defense News

The Life Guard and the RAF

It seems that former Life Guard and international crooner James Blunt had a bad experience trying to get to a morale boosting concert in Afghanistan.

On the face of it everything that could go wrong at the hands of the RAF did and the concert had to be cancelled.

As  former air force officer (in my case the RAAF) it really hurts to hear these tales of woe.  Being a fighter jock is great and glamorous but the real projection of strategic power in the sorts of conflicts we chose to fight these days can only be achieved by the so called “trash haulers”.  But it appears that they aren’t very good at it.  A big size 12 boot up the arse is definitely required here.

FARNBOROUGH: Hawker Beechcraft flies in armed AT-6 testbed

 Flight International is carrying this article on the proposed AT-6 which crosses a T-6 Texan trainer with the mission package of an A-10  "Hog" .  The article sort of suggests that customers of an AT-6 would be getting a cut price Warthog.  Not so!  The heart of the Warthog is the gun, the GAU -8 Avenger.  An antitank gun firing DU 30 mm rounds at over 4,000 rounds per minute, powerful enough to shred the frontal armour of a main battle tank.  The gun, when firing, produces 10,000 lb of reverse thrust!  So you need a solid airframe and lots of thrust to carry it.

So a cut price tank buster...I don't think so!   A super hot COIN bird...maybe.



FARNBOROUGH: Hawker Beechcraft flies in armed AT-6 testbed: "What do you get when you cross a basic trainer with one of the world's most potent ground-attack aircraft? Hawker Beechcraft believes it has the answer,..."

Richards new UK armed forces head

Richards new UK armed forces head: "Gen Sir David Richards is named as the next Chief of the Defence Staff - the head of the British armed forces."

This comes as no surprise given the amount of trailing that has gone on.  Whilst it is inevitable after the rather unsuccessful  CDS incumbency by Sir Jock Stirrup it doesn't make me happy.

I have no doubt that General Richards is a skilled and courageous soldier whose service in Sierra Leone and his tenure as CGS during the current war in Afghanistan give him peerless credentials for the post and thereby lies the problem. General Richards is a soldier, an armoured warfare man, a boots on the ground military commander.  He is ideal to lead a military engaged in a deadly asymmetric struggle with a dangerous adversary.  But we have larger and far more dangerous potential enemies.  Potential enemies that have nuclear capability, powerful air arms (I would remind everyone that the Taliban has no aircraft) and maritime power projection (the Taliban hasn't any of that either), capabilities that General Richards is hardly instinctively well-disposed towards.  Will he be a powerful voice in Whitehall to advocate a much wider strategic view?  Well we'll soon see with the forthcoming Strategic Defence Review.

So my worry is that we will take our eyes off the ball and throw out the baby with the bathwater (to mix my metaphors).  I am afraid that  it might be no aircraft carriers, no new Typhoons, no Joint Strike Fighters and maybe even no Trident.  Moscow, Tehran and Islamabad are probably much cheered by the appointment.

Back

The Flight of the Turkey

Well it's finally happened!  It flies!!  But will it do the things we want it to and will it be good value for money?   More importantly how will we we pay for it?
And at the present rate of progress it should reach IOC about 2024.
(Article from FlightGlobal.com)
PICTURES: Airbus celebrates as A400M gets airborne: "The A400M took off on its first test flight at 10:15 local time from San Pablo airport in Spain ..."

Back

Pot Calling the Kettle Black

So Iraq "amateurs" were to blame!
Army chief blames Iraq 'amateurs': "A senior official tells the inquiry into the Iraq war that 'amateurs' with limited experience were put into key roles in the country."

This is a bit rich coming from the  man who was "taken by surprise" and "unprepared for the speed of victory" in the Second Gulf War. During the First Gulf War the Iraqis were crushed in no time.  Did he think it would be any different the second time around?

Image from The Telegraph

Back

Airbus confirms A400M first flight this Friday

Almost there!  I've started holding my breath in eager anticipation.  Never in the field of aircraft development has so little taken so long.  As I have blogged before a hi-lo mix of C-17s and C-130Js would be better and cheaper. This is a purely political aircraft and it's now almost too late to save the taxpayer humungous sums of money.  Do you realise that if this aircraft didn't exist we could buy 67,983 IED-proof armoured vehicles and 6 million sets of body armour and put them to good use saving lives?  (Actually I made up the numbers for effect but I'm sure you get the point).

Airbus confirms A400M first flight this Friday: "Airbus Military has confirmed that its A400M transport is scheduled to make its first flight on 11 December, with aircraft MSN001 due to lift off from San..."

Source:

 

Back

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

The rather elegant blog Defence of the Realm which is not only well thought out but has interesting and perceptive analysis is running a story on changes to tactical doctrine in UK warfighting in Afghanistan.  The new doctrine will be taught to all new army officers.  But is the doctrine really new?  It sets out the need to bribe the Taliban with "bags of gold" in order to buy them off.  This strategy for the UK has a long and ignominious history going back to William Pitt the Younger and the bribing of most of Europe to stand fast against the tyrrany of Bonaparte.  An analysis of British foreign policy over the last 300 years shows little evidence of the stupendously misguided concept, advanced by the late Robin Cook, of the UK having an "ethical foreign policy".  

This policy of bribery (exquisitely announced on the eve of the Queen's Speech which inter alia outlined  the  Bribery Bill, which will make it offence to bribe foreign officials and for business to fail to prevent bribery) also acknowledges that our counter-insurgency tactics, learned in Northern Ireland, don't work generally.  Perhaps this will put an end to the extremely irksome behaviour exhibited by some senior army officers of going round saying to anyone who will listen "Now pay attention you lot, we know all about the right way to conduct these sort of operations"

Hopefully this will all lead to a new generation of army leaders who actually understand how to prosecute these wars.  Unfortunately the admission that we have got it wrong will be of little comfort to the wounded warriors of the current conflict.

It seems that the young Independent Whig might have had it right after all.

Back

Time for a Wound Decoration?

Throughout history more soldiers have been wounded in battle than killed.  Many died shortly afterwards but in general there are more wounded than killed.
In the 20th Century the ratio has dramatically improved in the number of survivors.  This has been due to two main factors: improved medical procedures, including the use of antibiotics to stop battlefield infections; and the advent of the battlefield helicopter.  First used effectively in the  Vietnam War where "Dust Off" or aero-medical casualty evacuation saved many lives that otherwise would have been lost, the helicopter has enabled casualties to reach high quality medical care in well equipped facilities behind the lines in much shorter times.  The probability of surviving even grievous wounds is now much higher than it has ever been. So there are now prorata many more wounded soldiers than there used to be.
No official recognition of the damage done to soldiers, sailors and airmen in the line of duty is made in the UK.  We give returned soldiers medals for gallantry and for being there but not for being wounded.  This is in stark contrast to the US where the highly prized and regarded wound decoration, the Purple Heart, has been awarded to wounded warriors since 1932.
I believe that the UK should now institute a wound decoration to be awarded to soldiers, sailors and airmen, and where appropriate civilians, who are wounded as a result of enemy action, which would include improvised explosive devices, the weapon of choice for those waging asymmetric warfare.  It would be particularly appropriate if Her Majesty, with her long and unstinting association with the Armed Forces, were to give her name to such a decoration and called it the Elizabeth Medal to complement the recently established Elizabeth Cross bestowed upon widows etc. of those killed in action.  Such a medal could have a ribbon comprising equal stripes of red, navy blue and Cambridge blue (representing the three Services) sloping down to the wearer's left like the Distinguished Flying Cross.  It might rank behind any gallantry awards or Orders and immediately before general service medals or campaign medals.
Such a decoration would show the gratitude that we have for those damaged in our names by active service.

Don't Cancel the Big Ticket Programmes

The next public spending round is going to be very difficult.  Although Macavity will be keen to offer new popular spending promises to the electorate  prior to the election so he can portray the Tories as dire takersaway, Treasury will not be amused and will insist that he cuts other things to pay for the handouts.
Against this background Defence will be particularly vulnerable.  Britain is currently locked in mortal combat with an enemy who understands and applies the principles of asymmetric warfare to devastating effect.  The outlook is bleak, the policy objectives muddy and the duration uncertain but long.  Despite all this Macavity will be keen to make swingeing cuts in the high value items of the MoD's budget and that almost certainly means the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF), already reduced to only one (what happens during necessary refits is anyone's guess).  Both of these programmes are multi-billion pound tickets and because the current conflict in Afghanistan is all about helicopters, protection and boots on the ground will be cut or worse terminated without much public reaction.
This would be utterly disastrous.  We must not forget that the Afghanistan campaign is being conducted in an environment of total air dominance by ISAF - the Taliban does not have a single aircraft let alone a credible counter-air capability.  Pakistan, on the other hand, does. Macavity will not understand about commanding the air to win the ground battle and so will see no military risk in cutting the JSF programme and doing away with the remaining CVF.  Let us hope that Service Chiefs will be able to persuade him of the foolishness of such a course of action.
Were they to fail we must then reconcile ourselves to forever give up the notion of "punching above our weight" and so pursue a similar military strategy to Denmark.

Back

Gordon Brown's 'dithering' leads to longer tours for Afghanistan troops

Macavity Strikes again.

Gordon Brown's 'dithering' leads to longer tours for Afghanistan troops: "Soldiers in Afghanistan have tours of duty extended because PM has not made a decision about deploying more troops".

Good News at a Price

Good news for the troops - upgraded Pumas, upgraded Chinooks and Warthog Pr - ATVs.  Hundreds of millions of Pounds worth. (About 858 Million Pounds by my reckoning)
And for the civilians care in their homes if frail. (Alan Johnson says this will cost 200 Million Pounds in the first year) So that's a another Billion Pounds of new expenditure committed this week.
All of this is very welcome but where is Macavity going to get the money and worse how are we going to pay for it?  Higher taxes?  More National Debt?
We should be told! 

Back

PICTURE: First A400M fitted with flightworthy engines

PICTURE: First A400M fitted with flightworthy engines: "Airbus Military has released this image of the first A400M fitted with four flightworthy engines and propellers. This marks another step forward in the development of the long-awaited transport aircraft, which had its formal roll-out in June 2008.


Louis Gallois, chief executive of EADS, Airbus’ parent company, said yesterday that it was looking increasingly likely that the A400M would make its debut flight in December. He also expressed confidence that the countries involved in the project will all commit to continuing it when they meet for negotiations in October. “Our hope is to fully convince them" by the end of this year, he said.



Well they're slowly getting there.  What a waste of taxpayers money when more C-17s and C-130s would do a better job.  MoD procurement strikes again!

Back