Air-Mech-Strike Study Group
AIRBORNE!
How to fully transform the U.S. Army into a "leap ahead" 3-Dimensional aircraft-delivered, shielded, "stealthy" Armor/Infantry-led combined-arms decisive strategic operational maneuver force to work in concert with heavier M1/M2 "2D" forces.
AIR ASSAULT!
WITH LIGHT TRACKED AFVs = DECISIVE MANEUVER
Air-Mech-Strike Study Group Confronts U.S. Army on Past, Current and Future Force Structure & Operations!
http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/CAC/milreview/English/MarApr08/indexengmarapr08.asp
http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/CAC/milreview/English/MarApr08/BookReviewsMarApr08.pdf
Plain Text
Mounted Vertical Maneuver Today; When We Need It: Use Existing U.S. Army M113 Gavin Light Tanks
Mike Sparks, Air-Mech-Strike Study Group
In reading BG (Retired) Robin P. Swan and LTC (Retired) Scott R. McMichael's pro article, "Mounted Vertical Maneuver: A Giant Leap Forward in Maneuver and Sustainment,"¨ and LTC (Retired) John Gordon IV and COL (Retired) David E. Johnson's anti-article, "Air Mechanization: An Expensive and Fragile Concept"; (Military Review, January-February 2007), I found embedded factual errors that were either to justify new
Page 126 March-April 2008 Military Review
FCS vehicle/JHL aircraft purchases or [to show] that what we have or want is not good enough. BG Swann argued that we don't have any equipment to perform air-mech with and must buy new 27-ton FCS tracks and giant tilt-rotor JHL airlifters to obtain air-mech capabilities; he claims we don't have and never had. RAND's retired LTC David Johnson argued against this concept, saying all we have to perform air-mech with is road-restricted 20-ton Stryker trucks that are okay but somehow open-terrain; cross-country mobile, 27-ton FCS tracks that are too vulnerable; and the JHL, which is too easy to shoot-down while implying that air-mech has never worked in past combat operations.
The truth is we already have 15,000+ air-transportable, amphibious, closed-terrain, cross-country-mobile 11-ton M113 Gavin light tank/APCs that have been used for years in successful air-mech operations by several allied armies; including the U.S. Army.
We have 500+ C-130s, 180 C-17s, soon C-27J fixed-wing transports and 400 CH-47 Chinook helicopters to airdrop or airland Gavins; the former at higher speeds and altitudes to avoid enemy air defenses than any non-existent tilt-rotor. MVM air-mech combat operations have already been successful beginning with the German Me-323s airlanding SP assault guns into North Africa, British Hamilcars glider-landing Tetrarch and Locust light tanks on D-Day and the Rhine river crossing, Russian assault guns and BMDs airlanded into Czechoslavakia in 1968. In 1978 the Soviets did the first heliborne MVM, into East Africa, a feat they repeated [with fixed-wing aircraft] in Afghanistan later that year. The Israelis airlanded M113s at Entebbe, the Australians into East Timor in 1999, the British CH-47 air-meched Scimitar light tanks into the Balkans to avoid land mines and fly over the Sava river blocking our non-swimming medium-to-heavy vehicles. American Airborne units were the first to parachute drop M551 Sheridan light tanks into combat to link up with M113 Gavin APC task forces to collapse the PDF and prevent Noriega from escaping Panama in 1989. In 2001, M113 Gavins of General Meig's IRF-Medium were denied being flown into Camp Rhino in Afghanistan because it would make the Stryker truck purchases look unnecessary (they are). Resultantly, we didn't fan-out closed-terrain mobile forces to block Bin-laden's escape, and he remains free today. In 2003, the IRF-M was slowly C-17-airlanded into Northern Iraq when it should have parachute-inserted M113 Gavins immediately and fanned out to block Saddam/subordinates from escaping to Tikrit to start the rebellion against us.
Air-mech by high altitude delayed low opening (HALO) parachutes at 10,000 feet above enemy MANPADS solves shoot-down fears and was done in 1972 to resupply An Loc during the Vietnam war¡ another inconvenient fact not reported by either MVM author's group. The Russians jump with drogue chute deployed parachutes with delay devices to effect HALO capabilities; we could easily emulate by switching the new T-11 parachute from obsolete static-line and d-bag deployment means. Ram-air parachutes opening at high altitudes make M113 Gavin platform loads into de facto 25-mile stand-off gliders but with precision landing guidance. All we have to do is field the new parachutes and practice with them to get HALO/HAHO air-mech capabilities.
It's the quality of the vehicle's armor that counts not its parking weight; a 10-ton M113 Gavin hull of thick aluminum is far more protective than a road-bound Stryker truck with a thin steel box at twice the weight; this means superior armor layering can be added that coupled with v-hull shaping makes the Gavin not only more air-transportable for 3D maneuvers by C-130; it is superior in armor protection than a flat-bottom Bradley that is supersized carrying a turret armoring dead air. 27-ton FCS has turret inefficiency and cannot fly by C-130s nor drive through closed, vegetated terrain and cannot swim like Gavins can to strike at where enemies hide. High technology Gavins with land-mine resistant armoring, band-tracks, hybrid-electric drive are stealthy for 60-mph speeds. M113 Gavins can be reduced in size to roll-on/off from inside Army operated CH-47s and C-27Js to air-mech now by either airdrop or airland and should be supplied to every airborne, air assault, or LBCT infantry battalion; Delta Weapons Company; and/or HHC anti-tank and mortar sub-units to replace vulnerable Humvee trucks. The M113 was originally designed for light units by General Gavin for as-needed all-terrain, amphibious armored transport, and with TOW ATGMs can act as light tanks blasting enemy vehicles and strongpoints for the dismounting infantry. A sapper squad makes them Engineer Cavalry Troops able to breach mines with probing and towed-rocket line charges. Modularity LBCTs don't need or get 27-ton FCS or 20-ton Stryker trucks; they air-maneuver into closed terrains; it's high time they be equipped with M113 Gavin light tracks needed to fight better than M16 versus AK47 and RPG at a foot-slog.
BREAKING NEWS!
Plain old "Gavin" M113 is ranked #1 by Top 10 IFV show
AMS-SG now owns a CH-47 Chinook heavy lift helicopter to demonstrate Air-Mech-Strike!, in fact the FIRST and oldest surviving Chinook!
VIDEO: Notice the serial number, orange paint and double rear wheels!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fepY4CvrYic
Clearly the mighty CH-47 Chinook is going to be "it" for Army V/TOL air-mech capabilities until 2025 or even later...
To clearly demonstrate to any "Doubting Thomases" that light tracked armored fighting vehicles can indeed roll on/off from inside Chinooks, the AMS-SG has obtained a CH-47 Chinook to do static load tests, demonstrations and flight simulations.
MOVING TO AIR-MECH-STRIKE HEADQUARTERS
Here are some pictures of our Chinook after it arrived beaten-up after 42 years of Army use and abuse.....thanks to inventor Butch Walker of Amaze-N-Tow USA, the oldest Chinook on earth---the last surviving prototype YCH-47A---was saved from demolition and given new life as a demonstrator of Air-Mech-Strike and AMAZE-N-TOW capabilities to lead the U.S. Army into the 21st Century!
"BEFORE"
"AFTER"
Here's what our Chinook looked like after 1 week of restoration/painting in tactically-sound GRAY camouflage (get the hint, U.S. Army?) ...
Our Chinook since its an actual helicopter will be far more realistic as a demonstrator than the typical wood mock-ups some NATO armies have to use:
Here's how "The Ghost Ship" looks now...after our first Air-Mech simulation with an ANT-463L-D pallet trailer and 4x4 jeep, "Mr. Shotgun" Brett Walker suggested we add simulated front and rear rotors to add realism but not be so high that we lose highway transportability...
RIGHT SIDE
LEFT SIDE
GUNNER'S POSITIONS
The Ghost Ship is now armed with two M60 7.62mm x 51mm NATO medium machine guns....
TOP AREA
The front of the "Ghost Ship" Chinook with rotor hub attached
REAR AREA
With simulated rear rotor hub attached...
We added an information sign with all-weather compartment to hold brochures and business cards...
COCKPIT AREA
...and with a simulated CH-47F all-glass cockpit display...
On top, we add a back-up, floating magnetic compass...
Here, we experiment with projecting a flight simulator program onto the covered front windshield of our Chinook...
2 x Combat Soldiers + 4x4 Jeep + Amaze-N-Tow Trailer + RHINO pallet with 4K of supplies + CH-47 = 3D air-mechanized, palletized logistics
We used a generic, CH-47 internally air-transportable 4x4 jeep as the prime mover for our ANT-in-action pics from our Chinook. This is far better than the anemic M-GATOR golf cart but it is by no means an endorsement of us of ANY unarmored trucks when we need armored tracks---we just don't have a Lynx or Mini-Gavin available right now.
Click on pic for Full-Size version
AMS IN ACTION: ANT-463LD combination trailer & MHE fork-lift rolling off a CH-47 Chinook combat-ready!
Here is a simple simulation we could create for the Soldiers in back as they ride or walk in from the rear ramp....
Bench seats in back of Chinook (we wouldn't have anyone sit on floor since that's where the light tracked AFV would be)
To their front behind the pilot area we'd show an CH-47-in-action video on continuous loop using a wide-screen TV/DVD player combo:
www.combatreform2.com/ch47inaction.wmv
Here's an excellent web page by retired Army Aviator Glenn Bloom explaining how the CH-47 flies and is controlled:
And a video clip we made on how the mighty Chinook flies:
How the CH-47 flies video clip
Here, the pilot, 1LT Mike Sparks USAR, looks back as the "Apache Havoc" flight simulation is projected onto the white inner cockpit panels. We used Razor Work's Apache Havoc flight simulation because it enables the Chinook to be ARMED with a 30mm autocannon in the nose, which we advocate be done to all CH-47s to improve frontal firepower and protection.
Here's how the $ multi-million-dollar U.S. Army A/MH-6 "Little Bird" flight simulator projects the screen from behind the cockpit framework:
a. Coverings on the fuselage to not let any light in
Here's a view of the motion creating actuators of the very expensive A/MH-6 "Little Bird" flight simulator. Eventually, we will place the entire Ghost Ship on a trailer with hydraulic actuators to increase flight realism, provide highway mobility while retaining ability to demonstrate static loads...the Army's CH-47D Chinook simulator [TM 55-6930-212-10] only uses a front nose section on hydraulics, too.
On April 1, 2006, Butch Walker Enterprises, makers of the Amaze-N-Tow forklift pallet trailer and the Air-Mech-Strike Study Group (AMS-SG) conducted Operation: GHOST SHIP to demonstrate to a contingent of Morningside Baptist Church members the capabilities of the U.S. Army's CH-47 Chinook heavy lift helicopter now in combat in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world, and to salute our troops that use this amazing aircraft.
To the left of Miss Jackson is her co-pilot and her boyfriend, Zach Walker....who remove their helmets on cue...to his left are the two crew chiefs/door gunners...Austin and Brett Walker. Brett Walker set up the sound system for the event....
Click here to hear the Might CH-47 Chinook Fly-By
...as Miss Jackson and Zach Walker man their pilot (right) and co-pilot (left) seats to fire up the flight simulator for take-off!
AMS for Stability Operations: CNN and General David Grange blow-the-whistle on the HMMWV and Stryker truck fiasco in Iraq that is killing/maiming our troops
Watch General Grange every Thursday Night at 6PM Eastern Standard Time on CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight TV show!
Retired General Slams Army For Failure To Release Armored Gun System
BY NATHAN HODGE, DEFENSE TODAY August 27, 2004
In an interview with Defense Today, retired Brig. Gen. David Grange said the Army needs to deliver the M8 Armored Gun System (AGS) to the 82nd Airborne, which wants an air-droppable light tank for "forced entry" operations such as airfield seizure and other missions."If they're not going to do this for the 82nd, it's a big mistake," Grange said. "The 82nd needs it." The 82nd Airborne, which is likely to rotate back to Iraq next year, wants the extra combat punch a lightweight armored gun would provide, and earlier this year, the division asked the Army to approve an operational requirement for AGS, which is made by United Defense, L.P. (UDLP) Equipped with an automatically loaded 105-mm cannon, the tracked AGS is designed for low-velocity airdrop, and can roll on and off of a C-130 Hercules tactical airlifter.
AGS was cancelled in 1997, but four complete vehicles were delivered. Delivery of those vehicles to the 82nd Airborne has remained on hold while the Army studies the feasibility of airdropping the Stryker Mobile Gun System (MGS), a wheeled vehicle made by UDLP rival General Dynamics. Grange, who now is executive vice president and chief operating officer of the Robert R. McCormick Tribune Foundation, a non-profit organization, said, "Airborne units and air-assault units need some type of a light tank, some type of a gun system. We should have had the Armored Gun System. We should have done that, [but] we never did-that program was cancelled."
During Operation Iraqi Freedom, elements of the 3rd Infantry Division, a heavy mechanized unit, captured Baghdad International Airport. According to Grange, airborne and air assault (helicopter-borne) units need extra firepower and protection for such critical operations. "I've been in airborne, air assault and Ranger units most of my life, and once you go in and secure an airhead, you're just keeping your fingers crossed as you're waiting for an armored link-up," said Grange.
As part of its effort to transition to a more rapidly deployable future force, the Army is investing heavily in the Stryker family of wheeled armored vehicles. Grange, who stressed that he has "zero relations" with defense contractors, suggested that those funds might be better spent upgrading light armored vehicles like the tracked M113, which has been in service since the 1960s.
"They're air-droppable, there's a version you can put a gun system on as well as a troop carrier, and we could have taken a lot of the light units and given them some mobility and protection," he said. "Not whole divisions-like the whole 10th Mountain and the 101st Airborne-but enough of them to give them some maneuverability and some punch."
The Stryker, Grange added, "I personally think was a waste of money because we had already so much stuff in the inventory we could have modified."
Stryker has been touted as a major success by Army leadership, which points to the deployment of the first Stryker Brigade Combat Team to northern Iraq as evidence of their capability. Proponents of the Stryker say the vehicles, which run fast and quiet, offer superb situational awareness and stealth, traits especially critical in urban combat. [Editor: Strykers and other wheeled trucks are road bound and easily ambushed. If you want stealth and 60 mph speeds in addition to cross-country mobility, use band tracks on tracked tanks.]
However, Stryker has come in for criticism recently, particularly after a Government Accountability Office report suggested that the vehicles were too heavy for effective transport by C-130 aircraft. Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), the chairman of the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee, has pledged
to hold a hearing on the issue.
The Stryker MGS, part of the Stryker family of wheeled armored vehicles, has not been airdrop certified, although the service recently airdrop tested a surrogate vehicle that was weighted down to simulate the MGS. The surrogate, a Stryker Engineer Support Vehicle, was dropped from a C-17 Globemaster III, a larger, more powerful airlifter than the C-130.
Grange suggested that Stryker variants are not practical for airdrop and rapid deployment missions if they can only be delivered by C-17. "The [C-]130 is intra-theater," he said. "C-17s are great, if you have enough of them. But as you know, there's a finite number of them. And they are more inter-theater instead of intratheater."
One member of Congress, Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.) been lobbying the Army for the delivery of AGS to the 82nd Airborne, which is based in his home district. "He's trying to do everything he can for the 82nd Airborne in a timely manner," said a press aide to Hayes. "They'll probably be going back to Iraq. And he wants to make sure that they have the systems they need."
Master Sgt. Pam Smith, a spokeswoman for the 82nd Airborne, said the division still has a need for the AGS. "We do have [a requirement] but we have not been told a date that we're supposed to receive it," she said. "We'd love to have that system." The four AGS vehicles currently are warehoused in Pennsylvania. A UDLP source said a full complement of AGS parts and a "combat spare" also are available.
DOBBS: The U.S. Army is sending hundreds of armored Humvees to Iraq to protect troops from attacks by insurgents. But tonight, there are new fears that the armor on those reinforced Humvees is still inadequate to provide protection
for our Soldiers.
Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre has the report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): With U.S. troops still dying in deadly roadside attacks, the Pentagon is spending $400 million racing to replace the Army's basic thin- skinned Humvees with reinforced up-armored versions. But the better armor is still not providing adequate protection, writes a four-star general in a memo obtained by CNN.
"Commanders in the field are reporting to me that the up-armored Humvee is not providing the solution the Army hoped to achieve," writes General Larry Ellis, commanding general of the U.S. Army Forces Command, in a March 30 memo to the Army chief of staff.
Critics say, even with better armor, the Humvee's shoulder-level doors make it too easy to lob a grenade inside. Its four rubber tires burn too readily. At two tons, it is light enough to be overturned by a mob.
General Ellis wants to shift Army funds to build twice as many of the Army's newest combat vehicle, the Stryker, which has eight wheels, weighs 19 tons and when equipped with a special cage can withstand an RPG attack. "It is imperative that the Army accelerate the production of Stryker vehicles to support current operations," Ellis says.
But critics say the Army is overlooking an even cheaper, faster solution than the $3.3 million Stryker, the thousands of Vietnam-era M-113 Gavin personnel carriers the Army has in storage which can be upgraded with new armor for less than $100,000 apiece. Neither the Stryker nor the Gavin offer 100 percent protection. Some U.S. troops have been killed in the top-of-the-line M1-A1 Abrams tank. But the more armor, the better chance of survival.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MCINTYRE: In his memo, General Ellis pleads for quick action, lamenting that, while the U.S. is at war, some in the Army seem to be in a peacetime posture. He writes: "If our actions impede the ability to train, equip or organize our Soldiers for combat, then we fail the soldier and the nation" -- Lou.
DOBBS: And General Ellis' remarks and note come a year after that war began in Iraq. What is -- what is taking so long for the command structure of the U.S. Army, the U.S. military, to provide the equipment that our men and women need in Iraq?
MCINTYRE: Well, I think the short answer is that they misestimated the threat that they would be facing at this point. They have been trying to adapt as time went on. They have been rushing the armored Humvees into theater, but now they are realizing they don't provide enough protection either. What General Ellis wants to do is quick action to get the authority to shift some funds around and ramp up production of the Strykers, so you can get more of those into
the combat theater.
But, as I said, some of the critics say they should look to some of the vehicles they already have in storage. They think they can get them there even faster. I think General Ellis is reflecting some of the frustration that the Army feels it can't act fast enough to get enough protection to its troops.
DOBBS: General Ellis, a four-star general. Who put him in charge of looking into this? What is, if you will, his portfolio?
MCINTYRE: Well, he is commanding general of the U.S. Army Forces Command. So his main job is training and equipping. And, of course, he's writing this memo to the Army chief of staff, who is the main person in charge of training and equipping the Army, General Schoomaker. So the right people are focused on the problem. The question is how soon will they have the solution?
DOBBS: Well, for the sake of our men and women in uniform in Iraq, let's hope very quickly.
Jamie, thank you very much -- Jamie McIntyre, our senior Pentagon
correspondent.
The military believes about 2,000 insurgents and foreign fighters are now holed up in Fallujah. The marines are hoping those insurgents will surrender their heavy weapons. But the troops are preparing to assault the city if the insurgents do not disarm.
I'm joined now by our CNN military analyst, General David Grange.
General, good to have you with us.
RETIRED BRIG. GEN. DAVID GRANGE, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Thank you, Lou.
DOBBS: I have to ask you, first, what is your reaction to Jamie McIntyre's report and the statement by General Ellis that, point blank, our command structure seems in some respects to be in a peacetime posture, while our men and women in uniform are in war in Iraq?
GRANGE: Well, Lou, I know the leadership of the Army and I don't think they are in a peacetime mind-set.
However, I do agree totally that armored vehicles need to be sent to Iraq immediately to solve some of these problems with the Humvees. First of all, the -- any armored vehicle can take a certain kind of hit and be destroyed or incapacitated. However, Humvees are not the answer. It's too light-skinned, even the up-armored, for some of these actions, whether it be resupply or combat missions that the troops have.
The interim solution is to take the inventory that was just shown on the broadcast of the old 113s, armor those, and use those immediately in Iraq to protect the troops.
DOBBS: General Grange, you are talking about what was popularly known as the APC, the armored personnel carrier, thousands of them, Jamie McIntyre reported, in storage and ready to be rearmored if necessary. Under current armor, could the APC still be serviceable, that is protect our troops in Iraq?
GRANGE: There's no 100 percent protection, but it would provide much more protection than a Humvee and they are readily available and can be up-armored quickly. The Stryker is going to take too long to produce that many. So I'd get something out there now during this very intense period in Iraq.
DOBBS: General, the question has to be asked, this is the 21st century. The U.S. military is supposed to be the most advanced and focused and technologically advantaged force in the world. Yet what appears to be at least at first blush when we have men and women without sufficient armored vests, when they don't have armored vehicles, even the old APC, it does raise a question, what in the world has gone on with our command structure? Because we've got men and women dying there.
GRANGE: Well, that's true. And it's -- when you are a commander on the ground, it's very frustrating when you don't get the things that you think, at least you think that you need. We relearn lessons from every war.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: General, excuse me. Let me be clear in my question, if I was not. I'm not worried about the commander at the company level or the battalion level. I'm talking about the command structure of the United States military, the Pentagon.
GRANGE: Yes, the upgraded vehicles need to be sent to Iraq immediately. They should have already been there. The Humvee is not the answer. I think there was the -- the assessment that the transition after the maneuver warfare to the stability and support operations were not be as violent as it's become was off-base a little bit. But it can be fixed now. Let's do something now and at
least provide the needed protection and maneuverability that can be afforded now with the assets that we have. It's still not too late to do something.
DOBBS: Twenty-two -- 2,500 Soldiers, rather, now around Najaf, the U.S. marines surrounding Fallujah. Negotiations continue, which are being honored in the breech here. What is your -- your assessment as to the risk and the necessity of entering in particular Fallujah?
GRANGE: Fallujah, I have a problem with the cease-fire. There are some people that generally want it in Fallujah, some of the civilian leaders. But the hard-core insurgents are going to continue when they want to attack coalition forces, unless they are disarmed.
The city has to be continue to be isolated. You have to separate as many of the civilians from the insurgents as possible. You have to control key terrain and the services provided to the city itself. And you have to take down enemy strongholds as you find them. It's the only way to ensure lasting peace in this particular city. I believe there's a lot of them, insurgents, in there and that's one reason they want to negotiate.
DOBBS: Do you think we should not be negotiating? Mark Kimmitt, General Mark Kimmitt, said capture or kill Muqtada al-Sadr. And the response so far has been, negotiate.
GRANGE: Well, in Fallujah, that out to be taken care of right now. I think there's some time for Sadr. Even though he's maintaining weapons, he's building up his supplies for a fight, I think that that can be worked out, I really do, with some senior Shiite clerics. But, in Fallujah, that's the immediate problem. That has to be taken care of. I think it's OK to have a cease-fire to give it a chance.
The coalition should give it a chance. But I would not test it too much with those marines. In other words, if it looks like it's not working, then be on with it and get on with it and take care of the insurgents in that town once and for all.
DOBBS: General David Grange on point, thank you.
AMS for 3D Maneuver Warfare: Army "fiddles" with mythical FCS and mythical heavy lift helicopters while our Soldiers burn in Iraq: Air-Mech-Strike 3D maneuver can and needs to be done today using existing equipment
Stop trying to fit 20 tons of FCS to into 15 ton helicopters...If you can't raise the Bridge.....
Maybe you use light tracked tanks under 12 tons that fit inside CH-47F/CH-53Xs instead of the 20-30 ton Stryker/FCS cash cows?
A 11-ton M113A4 Gavin can be made roadside bomb and RPG resistant with a C4ISR network-centric warfare package, hybrid-electric drive, band tracks etc. for under $500,000. It can even be narrowed to fit inside a CH-47F/CH-53X. Beats wheeled FCS trucks at $10 million each in 2012, doesn't it?
Erickson AirCrane of Oregon could mate the CH-53e's powerful 3 engines and 7 bladed rotors to their S-64 SkyCranes to create a 20-ton AMS heavy lift helicopter. Piasecki can make the CH-47F/CH-53X fly 200 mph for 2,000 faster with their ring-tail compound helicopter technology to effect the "vertical maneuver" we desire. See photos below. Do we want to just TALK about vertical maneuver or DO IT?
We call this "Air-Mech-Strike" and its all in our book. Maybe more Generals should read it?
www.defensedaily.com/cgi/rw/show_mag.cgi?pub=rw&mon=0304&file=0304vertical.htm
BREAKING M113 GAVIN NEWS!!
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/04/28/wirq128.xml
By David Rennie in Washington
Armoured cars being sent to Iraq are not up to the job, according to a senior United States army general, prompting calls for Pentagon chiefs to swallow their pride and reactivate thousands of mothballed Vietnam-era armoured personnel carriers.
With improvised bombs, rifle fire and rocket-propelled grenades taking an ever deadlier toll on coalition forces, the Pentagon is spending £225 million to replace thin-skinned versions of the Humvee, the US military's ubiquitous jeep-like transport, with an "up-armoured" model, as fast as they can be churned off the production line.
Humvees are proving easy prey on the streets of Iraq
Commanders have shuddered as troops attached home-made armour plating and even sandbags to ordinary Humvees, whose thin skin, canvas doors and shoulder height windows have made them highly vulnerable to attack.
The new, armour-plated Humvees have been touted by Pentagon chiefs as the best solution to complaints from the field about the standard version of the vehicle.
But Gen Larry Ellis, the commanding general of US army forces, told his superiors that even the armoured Humvee is proving ineffective.
In a memo leaked to CNN television, he wrote: "Commanders in the field are reporting to me that the up-armoured Humvee is not providing the solution the army hoped to achieve."
Reports from the field say that even with armour plating, the Humvee's rubber tyres can be burnt out by a Molotov cocktail, while at two tons, it is light enough to be turned over by a mob.
Gen Ellis said it was "imperative" that the Pentagon instead accelerate production of the newest armoured personnel carrier, the Stryker, which weighs 19 tons and moves at high speed on eight rubber tyres.
But the Stryker has many influential critics who say it is too big to be flown easily on the military's C-130 transport aircraft, and too cumbersome to manoeuvre in narrow streets. Instead, they want the Pentagon to turn back the clock and re-deploy thousands of Vietnam-era M-113 "Gavin" armoured personnel carriers, which are still used by support and engineering units, and are held in huge numbers by reserve units.
Gary Motsek, the deputy director of support operations for U.S. Army materiel command, said: "I have roughly 700 113-series vehicles sitting pre-positioned in Kuwait, though some are in need of repairs. I have them available right now, if they want them."
New heavy-lift helicopters could give the U.S. military unprecedented rapid-deployment capability, but first the Pentagon must attack budgetary problems and inter-service rivalries.
By John R. Guardiano
Army generals dont always speak well about the marine corps. The two services have long enjoyed a healthy, and sometimes not-so-healthy, rivalry. The competition has intensified now that the marines are returning to Iraq to replace Army units.
So it was newsworthy when, three months ago, the Army's Chief of Staff, Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, went out of his way to praise the marines procurement of the V-22 Osprey.
The reality is that that kind of capability allows you to move at C-130 speeds and C-130 distances, Schoomaker said. Its huge in terms of what it means for battlefield mobility and agility. And I think the marine corps, when it gets the V-22, is going to find itself able to operate further out over the horizon.
This is something that the Army is going to get informed about, Schoomaker added. Part of what were looking at is transformation of Army aviation, and were going to have to look at those kinds of speeds and distances.
Schoomaker, a former head of the Special Operations Command, was brought out of retirement last August by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to shake up an Army many observers think has become too bureaucratized and inflexible.
Its not that the Army intends to procure the V-22. Schoomaker clearly stated the service will not. There is nobody right now thats thinking about buying a V-22 for the Army, he said.
However, the capability that the Osprey brings to the battlefield twice the speed, three times the payload, and six times the range of a conventional helicopter, with the ability to self-deploy clearly does interest Schoomaker. Such capability could address the Army's increasingly stringent heavy-lift requirements.
I want to see what's beyond the V-22, he said. There's a dimension beyond that. Its like V-22 capability with a CH-47-size box or a C-130-size box the advanced tactical transport tilt-rotor.
Schoomaker was referring to Bell Helicopter Textron's proposed quad tilt-rotor, one of many ideas now being floated to address the Army's need for more capable heavy-lift, intra-theater logistical supply aircraft.
All of the services require enhanced heavy-lift capability. However, the requirement is most pressing for the Army and Marine Corps, the two services tasked with landing troops on the ground, typically in distant and austere environments with no nearby landing bases.
Schoomaker, in fact, referred to the militarys experience in Afghanistan, where marines and Special Operations Forces were inserted on the ground from ships 900 mi. offshore via helicopters, mostly CH-53E Super Stallions. The mission was successful, but it clearly strained the logistical capabilities of the U.S. military.
Indeed, these helicopters had to be refueled four times en route to Afghanistan. The Osprey would have required just one or two refuelings and it could have performed the mission twice as fast, Schoomaker noted. This speed advantage would make the V-22 considerably less vulnerable to rocket-propelled grenades. Moreover, unlike the CH-53E, the Special Forces CV-22 (and perhaps the marine corps MV-22) will employ Defensive Infrared Counter Measures (DIRCM) to defend against shoulder-fired missiles.
The problem for the Army and the marine corps is that these types of difficult and challenging missions are now the rule, not the exceptionand the rule surely will grow more exacting on the U.S. military. The Super Stallions, after all, made the trek to Afghanistan over friendly, non-hostile airspace. But what happens when thats not the case, as it was not in Iraq?
For the U.S. military, Iraq and Afghanistan are the future, said Tom Donnelly, a military analyst with the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. The problems were encountering there are going to repeat themselves in future conflicts.
I think Turkey got everyones attention and its become a real catalyst for change, said Mark Gibson, a retired marine corps aviator who now analyzes future concepts for Bell. People realize that even our allies may not allow us to stage operations from their territory, so we need to rethink how we do things.
Turkey did not permit the United States to launch an invasion of Iraq from its territory. This denied the U.S. military a northern front in the war, thus permitting thousands of anti-American armed insurgents to escape the Army and marine forces to their south. These insurgents have since launched a powerful guerilla operation that has bedeviled the U.S military and killed more American troops than were killed during major combat operations last spring.
The Army has heeded this lesson, which is why the service seeks greater heavy-lift capability, said Col. Ellis Golson, director of the Combat Development Directorate at Ft. Rucker. It took a good bit of time to get the 101st [Airborne Division] up to Mosul, he said. And when we do airlift them in, they're limited by how far they can walk, because we can't put a mounted maneuver force on the ground.
But if that were possible through a more capable heavy-lift aircraft, then the Army would have great asymmetric capability. For example, an enemy might know where U.S. airplanes are being staged, but that location could be entirely separate from where American infantry forces are coalescing.
If you're going to execute operational maneuver, then you're going to need the capability to put a force down in a position of advantage whenever and wherever you want, Golson explained. Otherwise youre limited to linear [military] effects.
Golson said that it is too early to speculate on the performance specifications that the U.S. military wants in a new heavy-lift aircraft. However, it is well known within the industry that the Army requires an aircraft that can transport its 20-ton Future Combat System (FCS), and that the service seeks to extend its heavy-lift range to around 500 km. roundtrip. Cruising speeds in excess of 200 kt. also are desired.
The use of heavy-lift rotorcraft to vertically envelop the adversary with the FCS force package has shown significant promise in war games and simulation models, reported the Rand Corp. in a 2003 study.
The Pentagon, consequently, has commissioned a Joint Vertical Aircraft Task Force to focus the military's acquisition and technology efforts on manned, vertical aviation. As Michael W. Wynne, the acting under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics, explained in a July 25 memorandum:
Planning and funding for vertical aircraft science and technology investment, infrastructure, research and development, and procurement do not adequately reflect the warfighters reliance on these important assets. Task force recommendations, he wrote, will affect the Fiscal 2005 and 2006 budgets.
The task force is focusing on vertical heavy-lift aircraft because that is the U.S. militarys most pressing, unfulfilled aviation requirement, task force members said.
The Army's only cargo helicopter, the CH-47 Chinook, has performed well in Iraq and Afghanistan and thus been utilized for troop assault missions as well as logistical supply efforts. However, the Chinooks performance underscores the increasing importance of vertical heavy-lift aircraft to the U.S. military, analysts said.
I think that among the Army aviation modernization requirements, the need for modernizing heavy lift is probably more pressing than the need for new attack or utility helicopters, said Loren Thompson, an analyst for the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Virginia.
Given the threats that we face, the Apache is more than adequate and the BlackHawk is doing fine. Where we have a problem is in an increasingly decrepit cargo helicopter that cant really do the type of logistical support that rapid deployment requires. Its getting a little worrisome, Thompson said.
Added Richard Aboulafia, an aviation analyst with The Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia: Theres no question that vertical mobility and heavy-lift capability are of huge importance to an Army that is trying to reinvent itself for this century.
Emerging Technologies
The Pentagon's director of transformation, Vice Adm. Arthur K. Cebrowski (Ret.), has dubbed the military's requirement for more capable rotary-wing aircraft an area of potential regret. These are areas that are not funded at the kind of level that is likely to produce a result which is consistent with the actual available technology, Cebrowski said in a recent speech.
Were moving to the non-continuous battle space, which is profoundly enabled by advances in information technology. Those advances will come to naught if there are not corresponding advances in battlefield mobility, particularly vertical mobility. Heavy-lift capability also is essential to supporting operational maneuverability, Cebrowski noted.
Yet, NASA closed down its National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex in May because of a lack of funding. The Ames Research Center in Sunnyvale, California, houses two full-scale wind tunnels40x80 ft. and 80x100 ft., respectively that are instrumental to developing new rotorcraft technologies, industry officials said.
Moreover, NASA zeroed out rotorcraft research funding in Fiscal 02 and 03. Some of that money was later restored, and the agency has since agreed to fund aeronautics research with at least $15 million annually. But $15 million represents just 2530 percent of what this funding stream used to be, said Rhett Flater, executive director of the American Helicopter Society International in Alexandria, Virginia.
Funding is especially important now because seed money spent today will go a long way toward identifying what is technologically feasible and cost-efficient, industry officials said.
We can build anything, said retired Army Col. Waldo Carmona, who now leads Boeings advanced rotorcraft research efforts. We just need to know what the military wants
Boeing manufacturers the Chinook and is co-producing the Osprey with Bell.
The company insists, though, that it is not wedded to any particular aircraft type or technology, but instead is investing in basic modeling and simulation research to illustrate the tradeoffs involved in any potential solution.
Every configuration has pros and cons, whether its cost, speed, or lift efficiency, Carmona said. However, he added, these are technologically exciting times.
We can do things with rotor blades that were unthinkable 10 years ago. We have fuel-efficient engines that can reduce fuel consumption by 35 percent and still extend the aircraft's range. Weve made great advances in transmission design. Our manufacturing processes are better. We now use smarter, composite materials, Carmona said.
Sikorsky officials agreed that if the financial commitment is there, great technological progress can be made; however, theyre skeptical about whether enhanced vertical lift capability is a true Pentagon priority. Even within the rotorcraft world, there are a lot of bills to pay, cautioned Kit McKeon, Sikorsky's director of Army business development.
McKeon said Sikorsky has a number of new technologies that it could develop to address the militarys need for a more capable heavy-lift aircraft, but he declined to identify these technologies because they are proprietary.
Sikorsky has publicly proposed a coaxial-design, three-engine helicopter that could lift upwards of 25 tons. This aircraft would not provide the dramatic increases in speed and range promised by the Bell quad tilt-rotor. Nor would it match that aircrafts promise of vast internal cabin space for heavy-lift transport. Cargo instead would have to be transported by hook beneath the aircraft.
Sikorskys coaxial-design heavy-lift helicopter, though, would cost substantially less than the quad tilt-rotoran estimated $50 million a copy versus $100 million a copy, respectively, industry analysts said.
Wanted: Leap Ahead
The problem is that the joint U.S. military doesnt really know what it wants in the way of a future heavy-lift aircraft, when exactly it wants it and at what cost. But without leadership from the Pentagon, the various services go their separate ways.
The marine corps, for instance, has committed to a remanufacture of the CH-53E. The new CH-53X should be flying in 2012 and the marines expect to take delivery of the last such helicopter in 2022, said Maj. David Dowling, the Corps' CH-53X requirements officer.
The horrible truth is that CH-53X funding ramps up right around the time that CH-47 funding ramps down, Aboulafia said. The Army is scheduled to take delivery of its last new F-model Chinook in 2018. The aircraft then has a useful service life of at least 20 years.
The CH-53X and CH-47F would give the services significant improvements in range and payload. However, they are still old airframes that do not provide the technological leap-ahead capability that is necessary for 21st century conflicts, analysts said. Indeed, neither the CH-53X and CH-47F can ferry the Army's Future Combat System, which is scheduled to enter service in 2012.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense needs to knock heads together between the Army and marine corps for integrated requirements and give this mission the priority it deserves, Thompson said. Our weapon systems are becoming more and more precise, but our logistical capabilities aren't keeping pace with these improvements.
USMC admits V-22 cannot even air-mech a pathetic "armored" HMMWV truck: time to cancel the flying deathtrap
www.spacedaily.com/upi/20040608-17423100.html
PAMELA HESS, Pentagon correspondent for UPI interviewed marine General Magnus on June 8, 2004:
The marine corps has had to install up to 1,800 pounds of armor plating on Humvees and other vehicles to protect marines against roadside bombs and rocket-propelled grenade attacks. The armor has been permanently welded onto about 3,000 vehicles so far with another 1,000 to go. The problem is what will happen to these vehicles after the war.
"That has pretty interesting implications. A Humvee has 1,800 lbs. of armor on it, now it can't even be lifted by the V-22 at the distances you want. And what does 800 to 1,800 pounds of armor do for you in Africa? Gets a very well-armored vehicle stuck in the mud," Magnus said.
The extra weight poses near-term problems as well. The vehicles were designed to carry a certain payload; the extra weight stresses the frame and reduces the amount of equipment they can haul, forcing three vehicles to carry a load one could otherwise handle. It also breaks door hinges and bolts, forcing more maintenance in the field and putting a further demand on other vehicles.
CH-53 HLH + M113 Gavins, AmphiGavins and M8 Buford/Thunderbolt Armored Gun System Light Tanks = Air-Mech-Strike NOW not FCS fantasies that never happen
Since there is no money to create a 25+ ton Heavy Lift Helicopter (HLH) from scratch to fly the mythical "Future Combat System", we need to adapt an EXISTING helicopter like the Erickson Aircrane S-64 (streamlined external loading) or the Sikorsky CH-53E to air-mech ACTUAL light tanks that EXIST like the M113 Gavin, its ship-to-shore amphibious cousin, the M113 AmphiGavin and the M8 Buford (105mm gun), Tracer (30-40mm autocannon) and Thunderbolt Armored Gun Systems (AGSes). Sikorsky's CH-53 HLH could internally load these vehicles and have them roll-on/off to enable full flight performances not possible when dangling vehicles with sling-ropes like a 1960s Godzilla vs. JSDF "B" movie. Here are some interesting artwork from the Sikorsky brochure. The M113 Gavin family at just 72 inches high and 98 inches wide at its tracks EASILY roll-on/off and do not need visual representation. What is fascinating is that the M8 AGS can with its big cannon RO-RO into/out of the CH-53 HLH!
CH-53 HLH
Interior Height
2.600 metre [m] equivalent to: 102.36096 inch [in]
Interior Width
2.950 metre [m] equivalent to: 116.14032 inch [in]
Interior Length
10.200 metre [m] equivalent to: 401.56992 inch [in]
AGS
Height: 100.6 inches
Width: 106 inches
Weight should be 16 tons with band tracks, good enough for 100 mile range mission
AMS co-author LTC (R) Jarnot says with rolling runway take-off you can lift 20% more payload which can be fuel and/or:
If you have in-flight refuel probes like USMC CH-53Es have now, you simply take-off with light fuel load and fill up in flight from a KC-130 for maximum range
GOOD NEWS FINALLY!
www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1463488&C=america
The U.S. marine corps is working on a new variant of the CH-53E Super
Stallion helicopter- the CH-53K - designed specifically for the combat
missions the heavy-lift aircraft is doing more and more often.
"This helicopter [the CH-53 family] was never envisioned to operate
tactically," said John Milliman, a spokesman at Naval Air Systems
Command, Patuxent River, MD. But for the last several years, the -53E
has been operating as part of the assault wave, rather than just the
supply line.
"The K, from the get-go, is going to be designed to go in harm's way,"
Milliman said. "For marines on the ground, that means that it will be
better able to support them no matter where they are."
The redesign is also intended to reduce the amount of maintenance
required by the CH-53, whose complexity makes it the Navy Department's
most expensive aircraft to operate, with 44 hours of ground labor
required for each hour in the air, he said. The -53K is expected to
show a 45% reduction in maintenance time and costs.
An initial $8.8 million contract with Sikorsky Aircraft, Sikorsky, CT,
was signed Jan 3. The first flight of the Super Stallion replacement is
expected in November 2011 with deliveries to the fleet in 2015. All 156
helicopters are expected to be in the air by 2021.
More Legs, Better Armor
The -53K will have ballistic armor under its cockpit and in the floor
of its cargo bay. Three phases of armor vulnerability tests are under
way at the China Lake Naval Air Warfare Center, said Col. Paul
Croisetiere, heavy-lift program manager for the marine corps at Naval
Air Systems Command.
While there will be far fewer seats on the 53K - down to 30 flip-up,
crashworthy seats from the 55 on the 53E, which had none rated for
crashes - the elimination of the center row of seats will help focus
the helicopter's mission.
"Passengers are the primary mission of the V-22 [Osprey], with its
speed advantage," Croisetiere said, whereas the 53K "has a significant
payload advantage and a primary mission of equipment transportation.
They will be complementary aircraft," Croisetiere said.
The -53K will be able to handle more than twice the external cargo of
the -53E - 27,000 pounds versus 12,100 - and can handle a maximum
weight of 84,700 pounds, a 16% increase. The new copter also will be
able to internally load two Humvees, one light armored vehicle or up to
30 leathernecks.
Fourth-generation rotor blades, designed and manufactured by Sikorsky,
will be more effective and will better weather harsh desert conditions.
Combined with advanced, more powerful engines and the latest in
gearboxes, the new aircraft is expected to significantly increase the
combat radius compared with the -53E. "Engine technology has moved a
long way" since the design of the current 53s, Croisetiere said.
The new helicopter's footprint will be only 6 feet narrower, so you
won't be able to fit more on the decks of amphibious ships, Sikorsky
representatives said. But they will be easier to handle and move aboard
ship. The smaller footprint won't mean space will be sacrificed. The
back of the helicopter will actually be stretched to accommodate 463L
pallets, or even Humvees.
Even with all the technological improvements, the look and feel of the
variant will be similar to that of the -53E, only more powerful.
Logistics in the -53K will be based on those developed for the Joint
Strike Fighter, allowing for easier interoperability among aircraft and
for training purposes, and lowering costs.
The -53Ks are projected to cost about $56.6 million each, making it one
of the most expensive aircraft the marine corps has ever fielded,
according to Croisetiere.
The nine-year program is expected to cost about $18.8 billion from
design to flight.
E-mail: gputrich@marinetimes.com
EXCLUSIVE TO THE 1ST TSG (A)! MEET THE CH-53E SkyCrane!
We spliced a very-hard-to-find 1/72 scale model kit MH-53E Sea Stallion's 3 engines, main and tail rotors to a 1/72 scale CH-54/S-64 SkyCrane to illustrate what we could do today to effect SeaBasing and Air-Mech-Strike since Erickson AirCrane is now building NEW "Aircranes". No model kit exists for a 17-ton M8 Buford AGS so we did the best we could and hooked up a 8-ton Scimitar light tank with a sizable turret to illustrate somewhat that the CH-53E SkyCrane could be the AMS delivery means for a M113 MTVL Gavin/M8 Buford/Tracer 3D maneuver force. Note that the CH-53E SkyCrane has Infared CounterMeasures (IRCM) and an in-flight refueling probe to extend its range indefinitely if tankers are available.
PHASE II: CH-53E SPEEDCRANE: Strategic Reach through Piasecki VTDP technology
These are pics of the CH-53E SkyCrane modified into a fast compound helicopter with wings and Piasecki Vectored Thrust Ducted Propeller (VTDP) units for forward thrust and counter-torque directional control. This "SpeedCrane" could do 200+ mph and have a 2,000+ mile range.
Using a rolling take-off we get a 25% increase in payload via transitional lift thanks to the wings and forward thrust units.
Meet the CH-53E SpeedCrane!
VTDP Compound Helicopter Details
Carrying a Light tank by Streamlined External Loading (SEL)
FOR MORE CH-53E SKYCRANE & SPEEDCRANE DETAILS: aircraftphotos.htm
Here is the best pic we have to date of the Mi-26 Halo's huge rear opening with a 7-ton Bv206S ready to load...the Bv206S is a "Chinook stuffer" so a little bit higher and wider is the rough outline of the CH-47's interior for way of comparison.
www.aeronautics.ru/archive/vvs/mi26-01.htm
The Mi-26 routinely lifts 20 tons and the new "M" model is supoosed to have even greater payload capability. Cost is just $10M each. Bottom line is the current U.S. Army and USMC brass are not serious about doing their job which includes Air-Mech 3D maneuver so we can get the Bin Ladens and Saddams of this world before they can do a nuclear 9/11 attack on America and the former are playing with $30M paper studies for fantasy JHLs that will never be built. We know for a fact we can air-mech now with existing M113 Gavins and M8 Buford/Thunderbolt AGS light tanks from C-130s by supplying them to our light infantry units. We can and should enlarge the CH-53X to fit M113 Gavins and M8 Buford/Thunderbolt light tanks inside. Another here & now option would be to buy a handful of Erickson AirCrane S-64s with CH-47F engines. Instead of taking that $30M and buying actual heavy lift helicopters we are wasting it on non-sense studies and power point demonstrations.
LOWER THE RIVER FOR EXISTING HELICOPTERS TO DO AIR-MECH
The thing we should do certainly is shrink a M113 into a "Mini-Gavin" infantry carrier so it fits inside a Chinook and equip all of the 101st with them at $200K each. The "M113 1/2" Lynx recon/scout vehicle will just squeeze in and out of the 90-inch wide CH-47 fuselage, so all we need to do is reduce the M113 Gavin's width to be a more comfortable 86 inches wide from the current 98 inches to make a new "Mini-Gavin".
Bv206S option would be $650 each. A detachable light ASP-30mm autocannon on either the Mini-Gavin or the Bv206S, makes them "female" tanks as well as armored personnel carriers/infantry fighting vehicles.
To make a "male tank" with a big gun that fits inside a CH-47D/F or existing CH-53E is difficult--but not impossible. In fact, its already almost been done except it was too wide and a bit too heavy (needs to be under 12 tons): the AAI "RDF Light tank" from the 1980s:
Retired Army Colonel Charles Lehner writes:
"Mike, when I was chief of the Land System Division at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), I started a project called Armored Combat Vehicle Technology. ACVT was soon embraced by GEN Bernard Rogers, C/S Army, and BG Al Gray, Director of Combat Developments at Quantico. Our primary objective was the development of a helicopter-transportable light tank. I contracted with Gene Stoner at Ares for the development of a 75mm High Velocity Automatic Cannon, and with Win Barr at AAI Corp for the development of the 75mm telescoped ammunition (a depleted uranium Armor Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot round and a High Explosive Air Defense round with Navy Mark-404 IR proximity fuze).
AAI also built a 14.5 ton light tank using a cut-down M113A3 chassis. We put on a demo at the Boeing Plant in Philadelphia carrying the light tank under a CH-47D helicopter on a short sling flying nap-of-the earth at 110 knots. The gun fired at a rate of 1 shot per second. A burst of 4 shots was enough to bring down a jet fighter flying evasively at about 4000 meters range and kill a Hind or Havoc Helicopter at about 4000 meters range (both with a probability of a kill of about 90%. A 3-shot burst with APFSDS rounds would kill a T-72 Tank head-on at about 2000 meters range with a probability of kill at about 90%. I believe that the light tank is in a combat vehicle museum in Manassas, VA. I also believe that Ares still has a 75mm cannon at Port Clinton, Ohio, along with a number of rounds of ammunition. TRASANA at White Sands ran a Force-on-Force Carmonette simulation that showed the Light tank performing better than the M-1 tank in a delaying action scenario in the Fulda Gap in Germany.
I contacted the Asst. Commandant at the Air Defense School at Fort Bliss who was very much interested in the 75mm gun, but the missile advocates picked the Martin Air Defense Anti-tank (ADATS) system which turned out to be too expensive; so the Air Defense guys wound up with a Stinger mounted HMMWV instead. The multi-purpose 75mm gun is by far the most cost-effective anti-tank/assault/anti-aircraft weapon system!"
Very Respectfully,
Charlie Lehner
This took place during a very troubling time period in the Army's history where the heavy invincible tank duelers ran the Army and they hated the light infantry and anything that would help them. Now the pendulum has swung the other way with light egomaniacs running HQDA who don't want to do anything that smacks of the heavy tracked tankers!
Phil West on his "Tankita" web pages describes in excellent detail the many options we have to create "male" tanks that would indeed be helicopter air-transportable:
www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/tankita2.html
We can certainly have a lighter gun turret than the RDF's 75mm ARES autocannon to be much lighter than its 14 tons on either a cut-down M113 Gavin or Bv206S hull (see UDES-XX-20 pics further down on this web page).
Clearly, CH-47s are too noisy to direct deliver troops safely and these foot troops lack mobility to get fleeting enemies. CH-47s and CH-53s are noisy and enemy can easily chose to be long gone by the time they land. Foot troops lack the mobility to catch up with enemies forewarned and more mobile on foot via terrain familiarity and light personal loads via caching supplies, horses and in pick-up trucks.
What ground vehicles can go inside the CH-47?
One of the "mysteries" of the CH-47 Chinook is whether it CAN carry a 85-inch wide Humvee truck inside or not? General Maxwell Taylor's Army officer son, Tom Taylor wrote a book on the 101st in Desert Storm, called "Lightning on the Storm" detailing how they HAD TO carry TWO unarmored Humvee trucks inside if they were going to conserve fuel to make it to Forward Operating Base (FOB) Cobra, deep in Iraq. Dangling a pair of Humvees underneath the Chinook would cause a lot of aerodynamic drag and reduce speed and increase fuel burn/reduce range. The problem is that the Humvee drivers would have to be INSIDE their trucks and couldn't take a safer-for-egress-in-case-of-crash-landing bench seat position and get into their trucks shortly before landing. It was "war" so the Fort Rucker and Lee "Safety Nazis" could be over-ruled. The photos below from Fred Pushies' excellent book, "Night Stalkers: 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment" clearly prove a Humvee can be loaded into a CH-47, we gather with SEATS REMOVED.
Meanwhile, out to the west, according to Pushies, Delta Force and the Rangers were flying in Chenowth unarmored Fast Attack Vehicles (high RPM, tire floatation "dune buggies") by CH-47s to hunt for SCUD surface-to-surface missiles.
However, after Desert Storm was over, the 101st reverted back to external sling-loading at Fort Campbell once again and knuckling under to the safety nazis for a dubious end-state. YES, tying down and untying vehicles is more work and causes the Chinook to be on the ground longer than picking-up and dropping off an external sling-load. However, as many people have written in to us after reading our AMS book where we show a M113 Gavin being sling-loaded by a CH-47D have stated; this slows the helicopter down and prevents it from using evasive flight profiles to get terrain masking, making it vulnerable to enemy small arms fire, autocannon and surface-to-air missiles. Certainly, some of the people writing in to us have a hidden agenda to justify continuing the feel-good lightfighter narcissists-walking-from-the-helicopter-dismounted-assault-close-to-or-on-top-of-the-objective non-sense. Funny, how when faced with desert distances that cannot be walked, both Delta, Rangers and the 101st can find a way to internally load vehicles inside CH-47s---and C-130s and C-17s despite their "we-don't-need-vehicles" bravado. What is professionally negligent and dangerous is that after these operations are over, at least the 101st refuses to learn from them and permanently change themselves to have a "mounted" (I know its a curse word--you are now a fat, out-of-shape, "mech pussy") Air Assault capability that comes from inside a CH-47 to keep 3D maneuvers viable in light of enemy air defenses and to improve their combat power on the ground to not get caught into LZ X-Ray type situations or be relegated to mopping up in the wake of more mobile ground units like the 3rd Infantry Division with tracked armored fighting vehicles (AFVs). The 101st, in occupation duty in Iraq, after many casualties driving around in road-bound, unarmored and quasi-armored Humvee trucks is now using cross-country capable M113 Gavin light tracked AFVs and while before they wouldn't even be caught "dead" in one, now they demand they only ride in RPG-proof up-armored "Super Gavins". Details:
The truth the nay-sayers don't want you to know is that INTERNALLY LOADING GROUND VEHICLES into CH-47s to get more mobility and firepower after the Air Assault is not only possible, but was once commonly done in the U.S. Army. The drawing below from TM-55-1000-205-20-1 "AIR TRANSPORTABILITY PROCEDURES FOR M38A1C AND M151A1C 1/4-TON WITH MOUNTED 106-MM RECOILLESS RIFLES IN CH-47 HELICOPTER" [www.tpub.com/content/chhelicopters/TM-55-1000-205-20-1/] shows how TWO small 4x4 jeep with 106mm recoilless rifles could easily loaded into a CH-47 with a mere 8 tie-downs per vehicle.
The jeep is a far smaller truck than the Humvee and you can easily walk by it in flight and take up a bench seat until required to drive it off...how do we know this? Well, because we own a CH-47 and a jeep and do it all the time for static tests.
The point we are making is if there is a WILL to improve Air Assault capabilities with tracked armored fighting vehicles---that has not been ruined by narrow-minded, light infantry foot narcissism---THERE IS A WAY. We can reduce the width of the standard M113 Gavin which the Army has over 14, 655 in service---modifying some of the thousands sitting unused in storage--to be 85 inches wide like the Humvee truck---to fit inside CH-47s for improved 3D maneuvers. We suggest eliminating 1 road wheel of length to reduce weight, too so the CH-47 can carry more fuel for greater range.
The truth is that there is more width inside the CH-47 than the light narcissists will let you know than the 90 inches published. If you take a tape measure you will see that the ramp is indeed 90 inches wide. However, at the ramp hinge width increases to 91 inches. With seats removed, you will see that the actual floor of the CH-47 extends out beyond the CARGO FLOOR'S 90 INCHES to 92 inches where the aircraft ribs join to the actual bottom. If you roll in an 85 inch wide ground vehicle onto the Chinook's CARGO FLOOR, you actually have 3.5 inches of clearance on each side of "wiggle room" for vehicle overhang or a Soldier to squeeze by. If you are not too chubby and are not wearing LBE, you can squeeze by and take off the vehicle tie-downs before landing and get into the driver's seat to drive off. If you are carrying ONLY ONE M113 Mini-Gavin, and the infantry/spec ops troops are behind it on bench seats, the driver can climb in from the back troop door in the rear ramp to take up his driver's position. If you don't want a Soldier or two squeezing past to undo the forward tie-downs, you can have them sit IN FRONT OF the Mini-Gavin> and do it upon landing or God forbid! someone has to hustle---have 1 or 2 Soldiers jump out from the front crew chief hatch and run around to the back of the CH-47 to undo the front tie-downs. All of this anal-retentivity-to-find-an-excuse-not-to-do something-necessary-because-its-not-ego-gratifying, notwithstanding is absurd...this is not launching a space shuttle. Certainly, an electrically released tie down strap could be developed for the front of a Mini-Gavin to put an end to any of these concerns. The point is it can be done and we are just not trying because we want to do the lightfighter BS we want to do---instead of the job America needs us to do--which is to get Bin Ladens (sub-national terrorists) which requires tracked AFV ground mobility beyond a foot slog with 100 pounds of "lightweight" equipment on your back.
SOLUTION: Shrink a M113 Gavin to roll-on/off from inside a CH-47 like the Lynx "M113 and a half" used by the Canadian and Belgan armies (see photo above). Propel by stealthy hybrid-electric drive and band tracks for 60 mph speeds and 600 mile range on one tank of fuel. Instead of packing in 44+ foot sloggers per Chinook, carry 1 "Mini-Gavin" with 7 troops inside (Driver, Track Commander + 5 troops) that roll-off into a COVERT landing zone outside of enemy hearing/sight combat-ready with superior armored mobility and firepower to then close in rapidly and when contact is made with the enemy, overwhelms him not pinned down in a M16 versus AK47 evenly matched duel. Mini-Gavins should replace the Humvee trucks in Delta weapons companies and Scout, mortar, S&T platoons in HHC to render armored mobility for A, B and C company infantrymen as needed.
Another AMS problem: CH-47s delivering break-bulk or palletized supplies without mobility means are not helping light infantry to locate and kill the enemy
PROBLEM: Supplies of ammo, food, water delivered by break-bulk via CH-47s endanger the aircraft as it sits and waits for human passing lines to toss out individual items. Even small "kick" pallets of supplies require floor rollers which prevent a rear M60D MMG gunner to be employed in flight, risking the aircraft to enemy destruction. Kick pallets on the LZ lack a means to move them, again creating a supply dump that needs to be defended. In either case the supplies are not with the troops fanning out when they need them. These items are too heavy and too many for foot infantry to transport with them resulting in some troops having to stay back and guard them instead of hunting for the enemy. The Humvee is not used as an internal carry prime mover; under-powered M-GATOR vulnerable wheeled trucks are sometimes used but can only carry limited break bulk supplies in back.
LIGHT INFANTRY RESUPPLY TRANSFORMATION POWER POINT SLIDES
www.combatreform2.com/lightinfantryresupplytransformationv3.0
SOLUTION A: supply a Butch Walker Amaze-N-Tow 463L pallet Dis-assembled delivery (ANT-463LD)combination pallet forklift/trailer to every Army light infantry company to use in conjunction with CH-47 prime movers. This will eliminate pallet rollers on the floor so a M60D MMG rear ramp gunner can be employed for rear firepower. ANT-463LDs will insure palletized supplies are mobile and taken along by troops, all of whom fight, non of whom are back guarding supplies.
SOLUTION B: use Chuck Warren's "CopterBoxes" to airdrop light man-packable loads so Chinooks do not need to expose themselves to enemy fire by airlanding:
Further reading: Airborne/Air Assault Logistics: the future of Warfare
RAISE THE BRIDGE WITH FIXED-WING AIRCRAFT & PARACHUTES: The 3D Air-Mech-Strike Assault that DID take place in Northern Iraq: what Army Generals overlooked in their lust to waste $BILLIONS of tax dollars on fantasy FCS and fantasy heavy lift helicopters: AIRBORNE AIR-MECH OPERATIONS
www-cgsc.army.mil/milrev/download/english/NovDec03/barclay.pdf
IRTF 1-63rd Armor, 3rd BDE, 1st Infantry Division attached to 173rd Airborne Brigade
Medium Ready Company
Heavy Ready Company
+ FSB and C4I elements
On 07 April 2003 the IRTF flew from Ramstein AFB, Germany to Bashur Airfield in Northern Iraq by 30 x C-17 Globemaster III sorties as the follow-on echelon to the 173rd Airborne Brigade which had jumped in earlier. Fanning out, the Sky Soldiers and IRTF Soldiers collapsed Iraqi resistance in the north by April 10th.
www.ausa.org/www/armymag.nsf/0/7A6FFCF6D28F558985256D2D0059ED5C?OpenDocument
June 2003
By Lt. Col. Thomas W. Collins
On the cloudy, moonless night of March 26, Paratroopers of the 173rd Airborne Brigade, U.S. Army Southern European Task Force (Airborne), parachuted into northern Iraq to seize the airfield at Bashur in support of the Combined Forces Special Operations Component Commander (CFSOCC). Within 25 minutes, the Army and Air Force, epitomizing joint teamwork, put a thousand Soldiers on the ground in order to deter Iraqi aggression against Kurds and factional fighting in northern Iraq. Airmen attached to the 173rd, about 20 of whom participated in the airborne jump, worked quickly to prepare the airfield for heavy follow-on traffic.
In the days following the jump, Air Force C-17s would bring in another 1,200 Soldiers and vehicles of the brigade's assigned and attached units. The Bashur airfield would also serve as a secure node to bring in tons of humanitarian relief supplies for distribution to Kurds and other displaced civilians in the region.
The Airborne assault to seize the airfield represents a crowning achievement for the Soldiers of the 173rd Airborne Brigade. Just 12 days before the jump, the brigade had officially achieved initial operating capability (IOC). This followed a three-year effort to create a second infantry battalion and implement other facets of the brigade's reorganization into a more capable and deployable force. Unlike any other airborne brigade in the Army, the 173rd is organized to give the U.S. European Command a forward deployed forced entry capability.
Formerly known as the SETAF (Southern European Task Force) Infantry Brigade, the unit was redesignated as the 173rd Airborne Brigade in June 2000.
The brigade's expansion was part of a larger U.S. Army Europe (USAREUR) effort to increase the capabilities of the Southern European Task Force and provide the combatant commander with additional, strategically responsive forces.
Lessons learned from previous U.S. operations in the Balkans and sub-Saharan Africa validated the need for highly deployable Army forces in southern Europe. In January 2001, the 173rd Airborne Brigade began fielding its second infantry battalion, the 2nd Battalion (Airborne), 503rd Infantry Regiment. Completed in March 2003, the 2-503rd, along with the 1st Battalion (Airborne), 508th Infantry Regiment and Delta Battery, 319th Airborne Field Artillery Regiment, form the core of the brigade's combat power. In addition, the brigade is outfitted with an organic long-range surveillance company, a combat support company with engineer assets (including two light airfield repair packages and a sapper platoon), air defense, combat support, and the 501st Forward Support Company. The brigade can deploy an immediate ready company within 24 hours of notification, and major portions of an airborne infantry battalion within 36 hours of notification. The 173rd Airborne Brigade has an exceptional tooth to tail ratio.
With a ground line of communication through Turkey denied, the brigade was an obvious choice to establish a stabilizing conventional presence in northern Iraq. Based in Vicenza, Italy, it is close to Aviano Air Base, the major U.S. aerial port of embarkation in southern Europe. The brigade's initial objective in northern Iraq, the Bashur airfield, was a relatively short four and a half hour flight from Aviano Air Base. This removed the need for in-flight refueling and reduced the fatigue of the Paratroopers who would need to hit the ground running. The U.S. Transportation Command was able to allocate 17 C-17s for the initial Airborne assault, along with the accompanying heavy drop package, and 12 C-17s per day to air land the remainder of the brigade's Soldiers and equipment. With shorter turn-around times because of the brigade's location in Europe, the Air Force was able to move the brigade task force of 2,200 Soldiers and almost 400 pieces of rolling stock in only 96 hours. This remarkable feat was accomplished with a total of 62 sorties of C-17 aircraft flown from Aviano to Bashur, led by the 62nd Air Wing from McChord Air Force Base.
Following the airborne insertion, as part of the build-up of U.S. forces, the brigade subsequently received elements of the USAREUR Immediate Ready Force (IRF). The IRF is a C-17 transportable unit that includes a heavy ready company of 5 Abrams tanks and 5 Bradley fighting vehicles, a M113-based medium ready company, organic fire support and elements of a forward support battalion. Command of the IRF is a rotational responsibility. For these operations the force was under the command of Task Force 1-63 Armor from the 1st Infantry Division (Mechanized) in Germany.
The deployment of the 173rd en masse would not have been possible without the extraordinary efforts put forth by U.S. Air Force, Europe's 31st Fighter Wing at Aviano Air Base. Within a period of only a few days, the Wing's 31st Mission Support Group orchestrated the transformation of this fighter base into a power projection platform capable of accommodating the 17 C-17s needed for the assault, as well as the total deploying force of nearly 2,200 Soldiers and 400 vehicles and pieces of equipment. It was a superb example of joint force coordination at its very best.
At the time of this writing, the 173rd Airborne Brigade is continuing operations in northern Iraq. The brigade has helped secure the city of Kirkuk and is now poised with other U.S. forces to maintain stability in this potentially volatile area. The Airborne assault by the Sky Soldiers, the result of several weeks of preparation at Central Command, CFSOCC, USAREUR and other commands, succeeded in placing a viable threat at the doorstep of the Iraqi regime and underscored the Army's ability to project combat power decisively. The three-year effort to expand strategically responsive forces in southern Europe exemplifies the vital capabilities that the 173rd Airborne Brigade and SETAF provide to the combatant commander.
LT. COL. THOMAS W. COLLINS became the public affairs officer, U.S. Army Southern European Task Force (Airborne) in June 2002. Before that he served at headquarters, DA Public Affairs as an Army spokesman. He also served in Operation Desert Storm with the 1st Infantry Division and is a 1998 graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff Officer Course.
VIDEO: 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta AKA "Delta Force" Air-Motorized Pandur 6x6 Thinly Armored Trucks by C-130 and Cargo Parachutes
We certainly don't like the POS Pandur but at least here, its being shown being LVADed from a C-130, indicating that Delta is at least thinking about parachuting in AIR-MOTORIZED forces behind enemy lines to do missions. Its progress to have at least some armor protected mobility even if its road-bound except in the most driest and flattest areas.
New AWC Studies:
LTC Bill Schneck's Army War College Report:Achieving Dominant Maneuver: The Case For Developing And Fielding A Capability To Execute Vertical Envelopments With Armored Forces
U.S. Army Transformation Report: Chapter 6 IMPROVING THE STRATEGIC RESPONSIVENESS OF THE TRANSFORMING FORCE by James W. Shufelt, Jr.
AMS in the News!
Ground forces will still be key in war with Iraq
Kit Lavell writes:
[Lavell flew 243 combat missions as a naval aviator in Vietnam. His book Flying Black Ponies: The Navy's Close Air Support Squadron in Vietnam was published by Naval Institute Press. He is executive vice president of Strategic Operations Inc. and can be reached at kit@e-stops.com.]
The campaign in Afghanistan was the first major conflict in which all troops and equipment had to arrive and depart by air. Besides highlighting the Air Force's newest transport, the C-17, which proved itself by flying in and out of austere airfields and bases, Afghanistan emphasized the three dimensionality of warfare. Consider an analogy to last month's Super Bowl. Seventy-ton tanks are the running game. Despite Tampa Bay running back Michael Pittman's stellar performance, the passing game (3-dimensional warfare) and defense overshadowed the running game (2-dimensional). "Air-Mech-Strike" is the passing game. The concept involves vertically inserting tracked combat vehicles via helicopter and parachute drops by fixed-wing aircraft. Last March in Afghanistan, the first employment by a U.S. commander of mechanized forces transported by helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft in combat occurred in Operation Anaconda. Canadians attached to the U.S. Army used Chinook helicopters ferrying tracked vehicles to attack Taliban forces from the air. Canada, Russia and several European armies have been developing tracked vehicles small enough and light enough to be air transportable. Some ground-war tacticians are critical of armored vehicles like the Stryker that have wheels instead of tracks. Tracked vehicles fare better travelling over mine fields. Critics who call themselves Air-Mech-Strike proponents advocate equipping all the Army's airborne and air assault units where the Stryker will not be fielded with small, stealthy, armored, air-transportable tracked vehicles. This would transform the army into a leap-ahead, 3-dimensional maneuver force (the passing game) that would work in concert with tank-heavy 2-dimensional forces (the running game).
6x9-inch, softbound, with 345 pages!
ISBN 156311616-2
Only $24.95
1 Book = $30.95
EASY-TO-ORDER
Send your check or money order to:
ORDER BY E-MAIL MESSAGE:
(Be sure to indicate book title & number of copies with your order)
ORDER ONLINE AT THE TURNER WEB SITE:
Air-Mech-Strike @ Turner Publishing (Fastest source: ships in 1 day)
ORDER @ AMAZON, WAL-MART SEE REVIEWS
What's the future for the U.S. Army?
"If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is tempermental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.
An army may march great distances without distress, if it marches through country where the enemy is not. You can be sure of succeeding in your attacks if you only attack places which are undefended. You can ensure the safety of your defense if you only hold positions that cannot be attacked."
FULL AMS-SG STAFF
BG David L. Grange, U.S. Army (Ret.)
Or Call
Join the fight to get AMS capabilities into our Army!
"U.S. Army Aviation: first to fly"
Where the past, present and future of U.S. Army/Air Force Aviation is discussed!
Since 1995, U.S. Army Aviation Branch has not had a FREE magazine that is distributed to ALL parts of the U.S. Army to inform and interact with the total Army. The U.S. Air Force's vital contributions are not integrated with Army efforts. This problem is now solved with the return of this UNOFFICIAL U.S. Army/Air Force Aviation Journal in an ONLINE format. Monthly issues will be posted here on the magazine web site and sent directly to the "in-box" of Army Soldiers and friends of Army and Air Force Aviation with a .mil email address. Those without a .mil email address will have to write the editor and identify who they are and why they would like to receive Army/Air Force Aviation Journal ONLINE.
How-to-Join
Click on this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/USArmyAirForceAviationJournal
USArmyAirForceAviationJournal group at Yahoo! Groups is a FREE, easy-to-use email group service with a monthly email magazine that will be sent to you. Yahoo! Groups also makes it easy to store photos and files, coordinate events, and more.
How-to-Submit Articles
Compose your thoughts in a logical, problem/solution type or other manner and email to the editor: USArmyAirForceAviationJournal@yahoo.com
You will receive a prompt reply and vigorous interaction with the editor to get your ideas presented to the subscribers A-S-A-P.
* NO SIZE LIMITS
* NO "PARTY LINE" DEFENDED
* NO CENSORSHIP OVER APPROPRIATE CONTENT
* CONTENT SCREENED FOR OPSEC AND POLITE SPEECH AS PER ARMY REGULATIONS
GO ARMY!
Air-Mech-Strike in Afghanistan!
The December 2002 issue of Soldier of Fortune magazine covers the Jarnot AMS Afghan operation!
December 2002 - VOLUME 27, NUMBER 12
RIDING IN HARMS WAY ON WIDE TRACKS
Airmechanization, a relatively recent maneuver warfare doctrine, is being advanced by Canadian forces in Afghanistan. who are showing Americans how its done. Kudos, amigos!
U.S. Army Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) Reports on Major Jarnot's Air-Mech-Strike operation:
http://call.army.mil/products/handbook/02-8/02-8ch2.htm
Another CALL report:
High-Altitude Operations by George J. Mordica II, Senior Analyst, CALL states:
OBSERVATION: The Canadian Army used the air-mechanized concept during decisive operations in the Afghani Mountains. They also have mountain-trained leaders (trainers) inherent within their organization.
DISCUSSION: The Canadian Army air assaulted small unit support vehicles (SUSV) into the mountains during offensive operations against the al-Qaida and Taliban fighters. The vehicles were used to move distances over the rough terrain at high altitudes, allowing the infantry to ride or transport their loads into battle. These vehicles allowed the infantry some small arms protection and helped them beat the fatigue associated with mountain operations. The SUSV is helicopter transportable and provides all-terrain mobility. The vehicle performed well in combat.
TTP:
Helicopter transportable light armor is an effective alternative to air assault infantry-only operations in the mountains.
The GATOR or other type of all-terrain vehicle (ATV) can serve as a substitute for the transport of equipment [on Soldier's backs] in the mountains to reduce Soldier load. This is terrain-dependent.
See them defeat the Taliban mentality in Afghanistan with smart COunter-INsurgency (COIN) strategy, tactics and BATTLEBOX and M113 Gavin light mechanized equipments all flown in, of course!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKa3tK3zi4c
EXCLUSIVE! BV-10S Viking Air-Mech-Strike photos in Afghanistan Combat!
From: "Jez Hermer"
Sir,
During a routine web seach I came across your interesting site.
I am (and have been for 6.5 years) the Royal Marine lead project officer for VIKING - I now command the newly formed Royal Marines Armoured Support Company.
The BVS10 / VIKING is a project which may interest you - it has huge read across with regard to a number of the key issues you speak of on your site.
Try a websearch with 'Jez Hermer'.. 'Royal Marines' or VIKING or any combination. You will note that I have just returned fom Afghanistan where I lead the very first (ever) operational deployment of the vehicle. The vehicle has been an unprecedeted success in theatre and is rapidly changing the Royal Marines' doctrine and concept of operations.
I include a here a couple of powerpoint slides which I think may interest you.... mostly related to air portability - (C17 - internal and external shots..) incidentally, C17 can carry 7 x VIKINGs... thus making it rapidly strategically deployable - and a shot of the vehicle under-slung beneath an RAF CH47. The vehicle can also be split into two component halves thus allowing for hot and high operations as the AAW is reduced by approximatley 50%.
Anyway..... you are welcome to publish the photographs on your website if you wish.
Regards
JP HERMER MBE
M113A3 Gavins & BV10S Viking Light Armored Tracks in Afghanistan
British Blues & Royals are using Scimitar 8-ton Light tanks in Afghanistan while vain Americans continue to be stuck to roads get blown up in Humvee/other wheeled trucks....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbE63uMtPoo
50 x 11-ton Canadian M113A3 Gavin "TLAVs" light tanks in Afghanistan with 42-ton Leopard C2 medium tanks in Combat
A Tracked LAV (TLAV) manoeuvres into position at Forward Operating Base Ghundi Gar. Having arrived as an escort for a resupply convoy the TLAV now takes up position as part of the Hotel Company Combat Team of the 2nd Battalion Royal Canadian Regiment Battle Group, currently in this location as part of OP HADRIAN. 2 RCR BG is an integral element of the Joint Task Force Afghanistan.
Joint Task Force Afghanistan (JTF-Afg) is Canada?s contribution to NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. The focus of this mission is to help Afghans rebuild their lives, families, communities and nation. Canadian Forces personnel in Afghanistan are working to improve the quality of life of Afghans by providing a more secure environment in which Afghan society can recover from more than 25 years of conflict.
Photo by: Sgt Craig Fiander, JTF ? Afg, Image Technician
www.sfu.ca/casr/np-afghan-06.htm
Punching at Panjwaii - Canadian Leopard Tanks in Combat
CF Tracked Vehicles Tackle the Taliban and Afghan Winters
Stephen Priestley , CASR Researcher / Illustrator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In to Ac
Butch Walker's Amaze-N-Tow Enterprises and the Air-Mech-Strike Study Group put on a "maximum effort" to convert the "Ghost Ship" into a flight simulator by covering up all the clear areas in the nose and adding a man/computer interface for Morningside Baptist Church's Thank-the-U.S.-Military Appreciation Day on April 1, 2006, called Operation GHOST SHIP.
Mike's good friend, SFC Steven Turner USAR came by to show the simulator controls from the outside-in
SFC Turner flies the CH-47 Chinook using a joy "cyclic" stick not unlike a F-16 pilot's stick on top of a mini-pedestal created by Zach Walker.
AMS-SG is developing a long cyclic stick to replace the joystick to add realism.
1LT Sparks switched to the co-pilot's seat to show the laptop computer pedestal station created by Brett Walker to power the flight simulation
b. Co-pilot and Pilot dressed in authentic TAN flight suits and helicopter helmets
c. Simulated CH-47F digital "glass" cockpit panel
d. Laptop-generated flight simulation using "Apache Havoc" connected to joy "cyclic" stick and projector
e. "Proxima" (Army slang for computer wall projector) sends imagery onto white backdrop panels inside cockpit canopy
Such a laptop/keyboard in a flight simulation is not uncommon...below is a European Aircraft consortium's A-400M military transport turboprop's flight simulator in action...the question arises--WHERE IS THE STICK FOR THE CO-PILOT TO FLY THE PLANE? (FYI in fixed-wing aircraft co-pilot is in the right seat) Does he fly the A-400M using a mouse?
Flight Simulator of Multi-Billion Dollar, (ehh, Euros) A-400M Transport Plane
With outer cover removed, its possible to see a close-up of the CH-47 Chinook pilot's position showing his seat, cyclic and in the background the laptop pedestal
The side black vinyl panels are removable and attached by wide velcro ("Hook, Pile, Tape" in military lingo), sewing was done locally by Ranger Joe's in Columbus, Georgia
Notice the side M60 7.62mm medium machine guns, authentic helicopter seat, cyclic pedestal and simulated front main rotors above...
Here, SFC Turner poses by the Ghost Ship nose to provide a sense of size/scale...notice the outer side of the cockpit panels are silver to reflect sunlight like a car sun shade
All who fly, re-enact as Soldiers in the back or roll-on/off a combat vehicle for load tests from the CH-47 "Ghost Ship" receive a certificate that they completed their mission safely...certificate created by Ms. Carol Murphy
Photos by Bill Rawn and Hans Halberstadt
"An Army Marches on its stomach"--so we first had to feed the troops.
A star of the festivities was a casually-attired puppy...
Also casually attired in a bright print shirt was Justin Belew, Leader of the Morningside Baptist Church "Passion Play" for the upcoming Easter memorial
"The Puppy! I want to see the PUPPY!! Where is he?" cried the children. We should have named the event Operation: PUPPY...with a guest appearnce by a CH-47 Chinook!
The sky was slightly overcast, not great for pictures but comfortable for the church troops to sit and enjoy a lunch and demonstration without getting sun stroke
The Mighty CH-47 Ghost Ship lurks in the background as the church troops devour their BBQ...
A cut-away poster of the CH-47 Chinook shows its inner workings and many attachments....
On the American flag table was a beautiful mahogany wood CH-47 Chinook model to give the church troops a closer look at how the aircraft is composed
The ANT Willy's 4x4 Jeep stands ready to roll off the rear ramp and into action...
Front view showing there is still space on each side of the internally-loaded Jeep for troops to pass...many did and got a peak....
RRRRRRRRRRRRMM! RMMMMMMMM! the Ghost Ship Demonstration Team prepares to spring into action!
Here comes the jeeep!!!!!
The Willy's Jeep roars out the rear ramp and ramp toes of the mighty CH-47 Chinook with LNG CEO Butch Walker at the helm and 1LT Mike Sparks riding shotgun with a M4 5.56mm carbine....
Stopping the jeep, 1LT Sparks hops out to provide security as CEO Walker leads the rest of the Ghost Ship demonstration team forward...
View from the rear ramp a crew chief would see of the parked Jeep...
LADIES & GENTLEMEN: MEET THE CH-47 GHOST SHIP DEMONSTRATION TEAM!
Butch introduces the pilot-in-command for today, the lovely Miss Ashlee Jackson...
Meanwhile, the Ghost Ship's "Little Brother Mahogany" waits for his turn in the limelight...
Here, the L.T. uses a pointer to show how the rotors of the Chinook rotate in opposite directions to counter each other's torque so no lifting power is lost as happens when you use a tail rotor...
After the briefing, the church troops march in and watch a video of the Chinook in action
www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0404/26/ldt.00.html
Replace the hopeless Humvee, Pentagon chiefs are urged
(Filed: 28/04/2004)
Vertical Envelopment
About $500 Million of that has come from the marine's annual budget. The Corps has forsworn new Humvees to pay for extra armor for the vehicles it already owns.
Reducible Height 92 inches
Length 361.4 inches with barrel/turret facing forward
? inches with barrel/turret facing aft
100 inches at its tracks
USMC Plans Combat Version of CH-53
By GAYLE S. PUTRICH
DefenseNews.com
Posted 01/16/06 11:01
Maximum power, minimum weight: CH-53E SkyCrane sheds 6 tons of CH-53E fuselage to become a 20-ton cargo lifter!
Note the powerful 3-engined CH-53E powertrain & 7-bladed rotor system
www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRheft/FRH9807/FR9807e.htm
"Mini-Gavin" = the Lynx Recon/Scout Vehicle
Armored Bv206S rolling onto a CH-47D Chinook in U.S. Army tests
1st Platoon Bravo Company 2/2 IN M113A3 Gavin light AFVs
3rd Platoon Bravo Company 2/2 IN M113A3 Gavin light AFVs
2d Platoon Bravo Company 2/2 IN M2A2 Bradley Medium AFVs
3rd Platoon Charlie Company 1/63rd Armor Battalion M1A2 Abrams Heavy tanks
173rd Airborne Brigade in Iraq
3-D maneuver warfare
Plus shipping--$6.00 first book; $3.50 each add'l
each additonal book add $28.45 to $30.95
Turner Publishing Company
PO Box 3101
Paducah, KY 42002-3101
Fax: (270) 443-0335
BG Huba Wass De Czege, U.S. Army (Ret.)
LTC Richard D. Liebert, Infantry USAR
LTC Lester W. Grau U.S. Army (Ret.)
LTC Larry A. Altersitz, Field Artillery (Ret.)
LTC Charles A. Jarnot, Aviation (Ret.)
MAJ Allen L. Huber, Aviation
CPT John S. Wilson II, Armor USARNG
CPT Carlton G. Meyer, former USMC
1LT Michael L. Sparks, Infantry USAR
SSG Brian Heitman, Infantry
SGT John E. Richards, Military Intelligence
Mr. Jacob W. Kipp, civilian intelligence analyst
Mr. Roy S. Ardillo, former Military Intelligence
Emery E. Nelson, former Armor Soldier
Carol A. Murphy, web designer
1-800-788-3350
Visa/Mastercard accepted
U.S. Army/Air Force Aviation Journal
by Maj. Chuck Jarnot
To: itsg@hotmail.com
Subject: BVS10 - VIKING / Royal Marines
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:38:35 +0000
Maj RM
AR2007-A051-0261
15 May 2007
Kandahar, Afghanistan
Armoured Vehicles - NATO/ISAF - Southern Afghanistan - December 2006