Author Archive

Greetings again, fellow Murdoc-cultists. The great and powerful Murdoc is once again goofing off, and has asked me to take up the slack with a few posts for you to educate and amuse yourself, and to productively use your time at work.

Our first topic is the troubled V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor, which is flying right over my head as we speak. The 418th flight test squadron out of Edwards in California has temporarily relocated to the tiny, tiny airport in Winchester, Va, only a half hour from my fastness in the wilderness. If you follow this link here, you can watch a very small video that shows some CV-22′s landing and whatnot, and hear the reporter mispronounce several words.

The reason the Ospreys are in my neck of the woods is simple. They need the bad weather that California simply refuses to provide. In particular, they’re looking for fog in which to test their terrain guidance systems. There’s typically a lot of fog up here, so they shouldn’t have too much trouble.

The Air Force version isn’t scheduled to enter service until 2009, but the Marine MV-22 will be heading to Iraq in September.

I haven’t actually seen one yet, they’re actually flying a bit west of where I live. I am thinking of driving the boy up to the airport to see if we can catch a glimpse of one of those, and if I do, I’ll post pics if I can get some decent ones.

Cross posted at that most excellent blog, the Ministry of Minor Perfidy. In fact, go there and read this post again.

The inestimable Noah Shachtman has a post up at the Danger Room, which I assume that you have all read. It’s hardly worth even linking, right? Oh, what the heck. It’s this one, where he talks about the new counterinsurgency guidance that the Army is adopting in Iraq. Read the guide here, (scroll down for the English part) and check out the Small Wars Journal while you’re at it.

This is good advice – and a lot of it goes back to the Marine Small Wars Manual. I have often been befuddled by why we have not been making more use of the lessons to be found there. The American military is unstoppable in a straight up fight, but counterinsurgency is a different ballgame. One that we have played before, with success. Max Boot’s Savage Wars of Peace is an excellent history of exactly that.

Hopefully, it is not too late. The missteps we have made have not lost us the war, by any stretch. But they have given ammunition to certain elements here in the States who do seem to be less in favor of leaving Iraq a democracy than merely leaving.

Here’s an interesting thing: a map of the United States with the names of the states replaced with the names of countries that have equivalent GNP’s. It seems that my home state of Ohio is, economically, a brother to Australia. Cool. Take a look. Thanks to Rocket Jones for the link.

The surge has failed, says noted military expert and Senator Harry Reid.

Here he is, looking into the Radiant Socialist Future:

Reid referred to the surge as an “escalation” that failed to achieve “political reconciliation.” Now, I may be a simpleton, a conservative and an ignoramus. But I thought the purpose of the surge was in large part not to reconcile, but to kill and overawe those who are committed to never, ever, reconciling with anything except a new Caliphate. And if that involved more troops – sure, but using the terminology of tired leftist anti-nuculer rhetoric from the seventies and eighties (maybe I’m oversensitive here on the escalation thing) is a little sad, and a little typical.

The fact that he’s declaring failure before the surge is even complete, well, I’ll leave the accusations of Treason and Un-Americanism to Murdoc, should he feel it necessary. But since Gen. Petraeus says it will be late summer before anyone can know how well the surge has done, it does kind of make Reid seem the defeatist little bastard, doesn’t it? Almost like he wants it to happen.

Feh.

Here’s a special, bonus, sort of linkzookery. Some interesting items:

Yesterday, the Victims of Communism Memorial was dedicated in Washington, DC, in memory of the hundred million and more victims of global communism. Thanks to the Daily Brief for the heads-up, I’ll have to check that out.

Also, the Brits are moving ahead on their new nuclear sub – the Astute, first in a new class of subs for the Royal Navy. Soon to launch, and only five years late and 900 million pounds overbudget. But look at this:

That wheely thing at the bottom would be great for the Iowa-class MBT, no?

My current preferred candidate for President is the Fred Thompson, who is apparently pissing off all the other candidates by out-polling them without even having a declared candidacy. And, they’re gunnin’ for ‘im.

A physicist is soliciting funds from you, yes, you, to conduct research into quantum retrocausality. That means, John Cramer of the University of Washington Physics Department wants to see if “signaling, or communication, in reverse time” is possible. I read both his sf novels, I think I might send him maybe a buck-two-fifty.

Tony Blair has turned the UK into a panopticon surveillance society. Let us hope we can duck that one here, but I think it’s largely inevitable.

And finally, it is my birthday. Please email me for details on where you can send your Apple gift cards so that I can get my iPhone.

AW1 Tim sends in an alert regarding the Bath Iron Works that our peerless leader drove by the other day. It seems that the House spending plan for 2008 says that the Navy must consider nuclear propulsion for future surface ships.

Right now, only Grumman’s yards in Norfolk, Va are qualified to construct the atomic surface vessels. General Dynamics yards — which includes BIW in Maine and Ingalls in Mississippi are not; though the Electric Boat yards in Groton Connecticut are in charge of building nuclear subs, and are also part of General Dynamics.

If the Navy did go with more nukes for the surface fleet — by no means certain — then there are three options — for bath to build the ships and have Electric Boat in Groton put in the glowing green stuff, have the work go to Grumman in Norfolk, or else certify Bath for putting in the reactors themselves. All of these have drawbacks, it seems. Grumman is already busy with the carriers and whatnot, and certifying non-nuclear capable shipyards would likely be a hassle, and expensive to boot.

But is this really an issue? According to the article, Navy Secretary Winter says that they are looking at a nuclear power option for the next-generation cruiser. But it might be too expensive. A 2006 study estimated that a nuclear warship would cost in the ballpark of 600-800 million more than an equivalent conventional ship. That’s not quite chump change even for our profligate armed forces procurement entities. Apparently, the Navy wouldn’t break even on fuel costs unless oil went up to (and stayed up to) $225/barrel.

The article goes on with more arguments from political types, but what is the value of nuclear powered surface combatants, really? For subs, I think most would agree that the nuclear option just makes sense. But do we need more nuclear wessels? We’ve got our atomic carriers, and we did have nukey cruisers, but retired the last of those back in the nineties, according to FAS.
Read the rest of this entry »

As I expected, in the comments for my last post someone recommended that the battleships be brought back from retirement. We all love the battleships. Armored to the point of (near) invulnerability, graceful, powerful, and loaded with 16″ guns. A battleship broadside delivers a mind numbing amount of shells on target. We dig that. It’s a spectacle. And of course, naval support of Marine landings is an important role. But how useful is it?

Step back a bit. There is a reason that battleships were relegated to a subsidiary role. And that reason is air power. The primary consideration is not that the airplane can deliver more firepower more accurately, because until very recently the accuracy bit was sorely lacking, and there is no way that a teeny, tiny airplane — or even many teeny, tiny airplanes — can deliver the weight of fire that a battleship can. I imagine that a single gun from a battleship weighs as much as a plane.

The reason that the carriers and their air wings achieved primacy in battle is the range and speed of the aircraft. Airplanes are faster than boats. Now, much faster. That is what allows a carrier to control a bubble hundreds of miles in diameter, while a battleship is limited to, essentially, line of sight.

Here at MO, the commenting-American community is often attacking the esteemed air arms of our military for their addiction to air power as a means of conducting warfare. I have seen many complaints that the battleship — and artillery for the Army — are slighted in favor of highly expensive fragile airplanes that deliver itsy little bombs. And it is true that the more, uh, –focused” among air power advocates seem to believe that air power is the cure for all ills.
Read the rest of this entry »

The Great Murdoc has invited me, your lovable furry old Buckethead, to guest post for a bit whilst Murdoc is on the road neglecting his blogging responsibilities and killing defenseless wildlife. This is, to be sure, a great honor, and one which I will undertake with my normal seriousness and gravity.

There are a lot of changes coming down the pike in the world of military affairs, and we’ll be taking a look at some of them. Among the items that our crack team of military reporters has uncovered are these:

• The Army plans to replace the venerable M-16/M-4 combat rifles with a new model assault rifle chambered for a new, powerful 3.3mm round.

• The Navy is considering adopting a new class of warship based on the DD(X). The new DD(CVX) will be — for a cost of only $7 billion dollars — a vessel that combines the offensive power of the DD(X) with a launch bay for Predator UAVs armed with Hellfire missiles.
• The Air Force, in an uncommon move toward cost efficiency, is planning on standardizing on one air frame for all missions and roles. The new Air Force will see all cargo, refueling, AWACS, strategic bombing and VIP transport roles consolidated with the existing air superiority, electronic warfare, CAS and reconnaissance on the F/C/KC/VC/B/E/R/A/EW-22E Super Raptor.
• Finally, the USMC will be separated from the Department of the Navy and integrated with the Coast Guard, there to participate in drug interdiction exercises.

Naturally, the astute among you will have realized that your pal Buckethead is pulling your leg a little. But only a little. I feel that the commenters here at Murdoc Online are at least half of what makes this website so cool. (I’ll admit that Murdoc is most of the other half.) The comment threads – even when they don’t revolve around battleships – are chock full of learned discourse. (And in the case of Dfens, deep, soul-scarred cynicism about American procurement policy.)

Blogs are typically reactive, it’s kind of the nature of the beast. As we’ve reacted to the news we’ve had a lot of, oh, let’s call it “spirited” debate here about the relative merits of various weapons systems. The Stryker and the M-8 are two of Murdoc’s favorites, and the DD(X) v. battleship debates seem to be a fan favorite – but we have discussed probably a thousand other ships, planes, guns, robots, and for all I know combat toothbrushes. But let’s be a little proscriptive.

So here’s my challenge to you all:

Since you’re so smart, what is the one thing that each of the military services should buy that would most increase combat effectiveness? Or if that’s a little too narrow, one thing that they should change, stop, kill, fire, or whatever. Naturally my answer involves UAVs, giant fighting robots, and zombies. But let’s get a few other suggestions before I weigh in. The floor is yours: