Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD's future? - We Are The Mighty
Articles

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?

Ballistic missile defense has become a growing concern. Russia has been modernizing not only its strategic forces, but has also deployed the Iskander tactical ballistic system. China has the DF-21 anti-ship ballistic missile. The need clearly exists for new assets to stop these missiles — or at least lessen the virtual attrition they would inflict.


Huntington Ingalls Industries has a solution — but this solution comes from a surprising basis. The company, which builds everything from Arleigh Burke-class destroyers to amphibious assault ships, has proposed using the hull of the San Antonio-class landing platform dock amphibious ship to mount.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
A close look at the radars and the VLS of a model of a proposed ballistic missile defense ship from Huntington Ingalls Industries displayed at the SeaAirSpace 2017 Expo. (Photo by Harold Hutchison)

The design is still a concept — there’s a lot of options in terms of what radars to use, and how the exact weapons fit would work. The model shows at the SeaAirSpace Expo 2017 featured 96 cells in the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System, or the equivalent of a Burke-class destroyer. That’s a low-end version, though. A handout provided says the system can hold as many as 288 cells. This is 225 percent of the capacity of a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, and 300 percent of an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer’s capacity.

Of course, the Mk41 can hold a number of missiles, including the RIM-66 SM-2, the RIM-174 SM-6, the RIM-161 SM-3 — all of which can knock down ballistic missiles. For local defense, a quad-pack RIM-162 Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile is an option. The Mk 41 also can launch the RUM-139 Vertical-Launch ASROC and the BGM-109 Tomahawk. In other words, this ballistic missile defense ship can do more than just play defense — it can provide a hell of an offensive punch as well.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
USS Hopper (DDG 70) fires a RIM-161 SM-3 missile in 2009. (U.S. Navy photo)

The handout also notes other armament options, including a rail gun, two Mk 46 chain guns, advanced radars, launchers for the RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile, and .50-caliber machine guns. Yes, even in a super-modern missile-defense vessel, Ma Deuce still has a place in the armament suite. No matter how you look at it, that is a lot of firepower.

The propulsion options include the diesel powerplants used on the San Antonio, providing a top speed of 22 knots. Using an integrated power system similar to that on the destroyer USS Zumwalt (DDG 1000) would get a top speed of about 29 knots, according to a Huntinton Ingals representative at the expo.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
A look at the sern of a model of a proposed ballistic missile defense ship displayed at SeaAirSpace2017 by Huntington Ingalls Industries. The well deck from the San Antonio is converted into a hangar – reminiscent of late World War II surface combatants. (Photo by Harold Hutchison)

The ship is still just a concept, but with President Trump proposing a 350-ship Navy, that concept could be a very awesome reality.

MIGHTY TRENDING

Iran just tested another ballistic missile. Here’s where it can strike

U.S. President Donald Trump says Iran’s test-launch of a new ballistic missile shows a landmark nuclear deal over the issue is questionable and that the Middle Eastern country is colluding with North Korea.


“Iran just test-fired a Ballistic Missile capable of reaching Israel. They are also working with North Korea. Not much of an agreement we have!” Trump said in a tweet posted late on September 23.

Iran fired the missile, despite warnings from Washington that it was ready to ditch the agreement with the United States and other world powers.

State broadcaster IRIB carried footage of the test-firing of the Khorramshahr missile, which was first displayed at a high-profile military parade in Tehran on Sept. 22.

“This is the third Iranian missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers,” the broadcaster said as it showed footage on September 23.

State TV did not say when the test had been conducted, although Iranian officials said on September 22 that it would be tested “soon.”

The unveiling of the missile came during a military parade that commemorated the 1980s Iraq-Iran War.

Iranian President Hassan Rohani said during the parade that Tehran will continue its missile program and boost the country’s military capacities, despite Trump’s demand that Iran stop developing “dangerous missiles.”

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Photo released by the Iranian state-run IRIB News Agency on Monday, June 19, 2017. (IRIB News Agency, Morteza Fakhrinejad via AP)

On Sept. 19, in a speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Trump accused Iran of supporting terrorists and called Tehran’s government a “corrupt dictatorship.”

Trump also called for a harder line against Iran from other members of the United Nations, saying “we cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities while building dangerous missiles.”

Referring to Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with six world powers, including the United States, Trump said Washington “cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program.”

Rohani responded to Trump remarks in his own speech to the UN General Assembly on September 20, saying Trump’s speech was “ignorant, absurd, and hateful rhetoric.”

Rohani said Iran will not be the first party in the nuclear accord to violate the agreement.

It wasn’t immediately clear whether Trump had made a final decision to continue complying with the Iran nuclear deal, under which Tehran agreed to curb its nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions.

Trump’s administration has twice certified that Iran is complying with its obligations under the accord.

But it also has said that Iran’s missile program violates the spirit of the nuclear agreement.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
ministers of foreign affairs and other officials from the P5+1 countries, the European Union and Iran while announcing the framework of a Comprehensive agreement on the Iranian nuclear program, 2015. Photo from US Department of State.

Washington is due to announce on October 15 whether it considers Iran is still complying with the agreement.

Other signatories to the nuclear accord are Russia, China, Britain, France, and Germany.

Washington has imposed unilateral sanctions against Iran, saying Tehran’s ballistic-missile tests violated a UN resolution that endorsed the nuclear deal and called on Tehran not to undertake activities related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons.

Tehran insists its missile program doesn’t violate the resolution, saying the missiles are not designed to carry nuclear weapons.

Articles

This is the new ‘Pitch Perfect’ trailer featuring the USO

The “Pitch Perfect” films are actually pretty funny and the music is definitely catchy — great date night movie (you’re welcome).


If you haven’t seen them, they’re about a women’s collegiate a capella (singing without music accompaniment) group competing against other singers for glory and what not. I was wondering where the third film would go, considering most of the characters were graduating at the end of “Pitch Perfect 2” — and now we have our answer: the USO.

(Pitch Perfect | YouTube)

This introduces some military-ness into an otherwise girly world — including military working dogs and Anna Kendrick flying out the back of a heavy — but mostly it leaves me wondering one thing: How would a group like the Bardon Bellas be received on a USO tour?

And on that note, who have been your absolute favorite (and not-so-favorite) USO guests? Leave a comment and let me know.

Articles

This ship survived 7 torpedos at Pearl Harbor and went on to help crush the Japanese

The USS West Virginia was one of the hardest hit ships at Pearl Harbor but rose from the ashes to destroy Japanese forces in the years after that surprise attack.


Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
The USS West Virginia headed back to sea in 1944. Photo: US Navy

On Dec. 7, 1941 the West Virginia was struck by torpedoes launched from a midget sub and immediately began sinking. As it sank, it listed to port and each subsequent torpedo strike hit the ship further and further up its hull. The damage was so severe that the salvage officer said, “The damage on the port side … is so extensive as to beggar description.

At least seven torpedoes struck the ship and two bombs pierced the outer hull but failed to detonate. Knowing West Virginia was going down, the captain and crew counter-flooded the starboard side of the ship so that is would go down on its keel instead of capsizing. An oil fire raged through the ship for the next 30 hours, buckling the metal.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
The USS West Virginia burns in Pearl Harbor. Photo: US Navy

The captain and many of the crew died during the attack. Capt. Mervyn S. Bennion received a posthumous Medal of Honor for saving the ship while he lay dying from shrapnel that pierced his abdomen.

One of the men who carried the dying captain from the fight was Navy Cook Dorie Miller who then returned to the fight. He noticed an unmanned .50-cal. machine gun and used it to destroy three or four Japanese planes that were still attacking the ships. He became the first African-American to receive the Navy Cross.

Recovery of the West Virginia was a long process. Patches of concrete and wood were used to plug the damage and the ship was sent to Washington State for a full repair. Entire decks and much of the armor belt had to be replaced. When the work was completed in late 1944, the West Virginia was a state of the art battleship, more capable than it had ever been.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
The USS West Virginia during salvage operations. Photo: US Navy

The crew wasted no time in getting her back into the fight to achieve vengeance. The ship returned to Pear Harbor, fueled, and rushed into the Pacific War.

West Virginia pounded Japanese positions on Leyte during the Army’s Oct. 17 invasion of the Japanese-held Philippines. After nearly a week of their army getting destroyed by the American bombardment and infantry, the Japanese navy finally arrived in force and the Battle of Leyte Gulf began.

On the night of Oct. 24, West Virginia and three other battleships resurrected after Pearl Harbor spotted four Japanese ships approaching the Philippines. The Americans got the jump on them, sinking two battleships and a cruiser in a nighttime firefight. It was the last time opposing battleships fired on each other in combat.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
The USS West Virginia undergoes repairs on the floating drydock USS Artisan. Photo: US Navy

West Virginia left for some small repairs but returned and supported other operations in the Philippines until Feb. 1945.

In Feb., West Virginia joined the 5th Fleet in their invasion of Iwo Jima. The ship got to 5th fleet as the invasion was already beginning and began firing at targets onshore. It later headed to Okinawa where it again supported amphibious landings by Marines.

West Virginia was present in Tokyo Bay Sep. 2 when the Japanese formally surrendered to the U.S. It continued in active service until 1947 when it joined the reserve fleet. In 1959, it was sold for scrap.

Articles

Iran’s home-grown surface-to-air missile shows new military aspirations

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani joins Defense Ministry officials at the unveiling of the Bavar 373 SAM system. (Photo: Tasnim)


The Islamic Republic of Iran officially unveiled the Bavar 373 system earlier this month. The system is supposedly a domestic long-range surface-to-air missile intended to provide area defense against aircraft and missiles.

According to a report by the Times of Israel, images released by Iranian state news agencies showed Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, and minister of defense, Hossein Dehghan in front of the system, which bears a strong superficial resemblance to the Soviet-era SA-10 “Grumble” (also known as the S-300).

The SA-10 was the Soviet Union’s main area-defense surface to air missile since it was entered service in 1978, and has continued in Russian service since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. Depending on the version, it has a maximum range of up to 121 miles. The system has been constantly upgraded, and more modern versions, like the SA-20 and SA-21 are entering service with Russia.

“We did not intend to make an Iranian version of the S-300 — we wanted to build an Iranian system, and we built it,” Minister of Defense Dehghan said. The Iranians had been trying to address delays in the acquisition of SA-10s from Russia, which only reauthorized delivery in 2015 after the Obama Administration made a highly controversial deal with Iran over its nuclear program. Iran claimed back in May to have operable SA-10 systems.

Iran has been developing some weapon systems on their own. Most notable in this regard are the Jamaran-class frigates. These ships, based on the 1970s vintage Sa’am-class frigates, are armed with a 76mm gun, four C-802 anti-ship missiles, and SM-1 surface-to-air missiles. While nowhere near a Burke-class destroyer in terms of capability (or even the Al-Riyadh and Al- Madinah classes in Saudi service), the vessels are with sanctions lifted, the Iranians could acquire other weapon systems for future vessels.

Iran has also built two fighters, the Azarakhsh and the Saeqeh. The first is a reverse-engineered version of the Northrop F-5E Tiger, a late 1960s day fighter. The second is an advanced version of the first plane and bears a slight resemblance to the F/A-18 Hornet, albeit it is much less capable, with only half the bombload of the Hornet and lacking a multi-mission radar like the APG-65. Iran has also copied the C-802 anti-ship missile and the SM-1, made improved variants of the MIM-23 HAWK, and even reverse-engineered the AIM-54 Phoenix used on the F-14 Tomcat. Perhaps most impressive is Iran’s ability to design not just upgrades to the M47 and Chieftain main battle tanks, but also develop its own main battle tank, the Zulfiqar.

In short, the Bavar 373 is just the latest in Iranian weapons innovation. Last month, high-ranking officials of that regime threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz. The development of the Bavar 373 means those threats may not be idle.

MIGHTY TRENDING

The Army’s new sensors can track small arms fire to its source

The Army is engineering new Hostile Fire Detection sensors for its fleet of armored combat vehicles to identify, track, and target enemy small arms fire.


Even if the enemy rounds being fired are from small arms fire and not necessarily an urgent or immediate threat to heavily armored combat vehicles such as an Abrams, Stryker, or Bradley, there is naturally great value in quickly finding the location of incoming enemy attacks, Army weapons developers explain.

There is a range of sensors now being explored by Army developers; infrared sensors, for example, are designed to identify the “heat” signature emerging from enemy fire and, over the years, the Army has also used focal plane array detection technology as well as acoustic sensors.

“We are collecting threat signature data and assessing sensors and algorithm performance,” Gene Klager, Deputy Director, Ground Combat Systems Division, Night Vision, and Electronic Sensors Directorate, told Warrior Maven in an interview.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
An M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle. (Photo from DoD)

Klager’s unit, which works closely with Army acquisition to identify and, at times, fast-track technology to war, is part of the Army’s Communications, Electronics, Research, Development, and Engineering Center (CERDEC).

Army senior leaders also told Warrior Maven the service will be further integrating HFD sensors this year in preparation for more formals testing to follow in 2019.

Enabling counterattack is a fundamental element of this because being able to ID enemy fire would enable vehicle crews to attack targets from beneath the protection of an armored hatch.

The Army currently deploys a targeting and attack system called Common Remotely Operated Weapons System, or CROWS; using a display screen, targeting sensors and controls operating externally mounted weapons, CROWS enables soldiers to attack from beneath the protection of armor.

“If we get a hostile fire detection, the CROWS could be slued to that location to engage what we call slue to cue,” Klager said.

Much of the emerging technology tied to these sensors can be understood in the context of artificial intelligence, or AI. Computer automation, using advanced algorithms and various forms of analytics, can quickly process incoming sensor data to ID a hostile fire signature.

“AI also takes other information into account and helps reduce false alarms,” Klager explained.

Also Read: US Navy exploring artificial intelligence for warfare network

AI developers often explain that computers are able to much more efficiently organize information and perform key procedural functions, such as performing checklists or identifying points of relevance; however, many of those same experts also add that human cognition, as something uniquely suited to solving dynamic problems and weighing multiple variables in real time, is nonetheless something still indispensable to most combat operations.

Over the years, there have been a handful of small arms detection technologies tested and incorporated into helicopters; one of them, which first emerged as something the Army was evaluating in 2010 is called Ground Fire Acquisition System, or GFAS.

This system, integrated onto Apache Attack helicopters, uses infrared sensors to ID a “muzzle flash” or heat signature from an enemy weapon. The location of enemy fire could then be determined by a gateway processor on board the helicopter able to quickly geolocate the attack.

While Klager said there are, without question, similarities between air-combat HFD technologies and those emerging for ground combat vehicles, he did point to some distinct differences.

“From ground to ground, you have a lot more moving objects,” he said.

Potential integration between HFD and Active Protection Systems is also part of the calculus, Klager explained. APS technology, now being assessed on Army Abrams tanks, Bradleys and Strykers, uses sensors, fire control technology and interceptors to ID and knock out incoming RPGs and ATGMs, among other things. While APS, in concept and application, involves threats larger or more substantial than things like small arms fire, there is great combat utility in synching APS to HFD.

“HFD involves the same function that would serve as a cueing sensor as part of an APS system,” Klager said

The advantages of this kind of interoperability are multi-faceted. Given that RPGs and ATGMs are often fired from the same location as enemy small arms fire, an ability to track one, the other, or both in real time greatly improves situational awareness and targeting possibilities.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Two ISIS recruits operate their weapons, a RPG (right) and a PKM (left). (ISIS photo)

Furthermore, such an initiative is entirely consistent with ongoing Army modernization efforts which increasingly look toward more capable, multi-function sensors. The idea is to have a merged or integrated smaller hardware footprint, coupled with advanced sensing technology, able to perform a wide range of tasks historically performed by multiple separate, onboard systems.

Consolidating vehicle technologies and “boxes” is the primary thrust of an emerging Army combat vehicle C4ISR/EW effort called “Victory” architecture. Using Ethernet networking tech, Victory synthesizes sensors and vehicle systems onto a common, interoperable system. This technology is already showing a massively increased ability to conduct electronic warfare attacks from combat vehicles, among other things.

HFD for ground combat vehicles, when viewed in light of rapidly advancing combat networking technologies, could bring substantial advantages in the realm of unmanned systems. The Army and industry are currently developing algorithms to better enable manned-unmanned teaming among combat vehicles. The idea is to have a “robotic wingman,” operating in tandem with armored combat vehicles, able to test enemy defenses, find targets, conduct ISR, carry weapons and ammunition or even attack enemies.

“All that we are looking at could easily be applicable to an unmanned system,” Klager said.

MIGHTY TACTICAL

Here’s a detailed look at the Army’s new M17 and M18 handgun — and how it shoots

It’s the first time the U.S. military has made a major upgrade to personal weapons in over 30 years, and so far, the only way anyone’s gotten an impression of what this new gun can do is to look at press releases and a few pictures from test ranges.


But as the Army is set to field upwards of 500,000 new M17 and M18 Modular Handguns to replace the 1980s-era M9 Beretta pistol, We Are The Mighty got an exclusive look at the impressive new firearm from the folks who designed and built it.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Soldiers on the range testing the new Sig Sauer M17. (Photo from US Army)

Comparing the M9 to the M17, gone are the external hammer, double action and decocker, and in its place is a slick handgun with a streamlined build based on the most modern technology available in pistol operation and design.

Engineers with M17 maker Sig Sauer likened switching from the M9 to trading in a 1980 Pontiac Bonneville station wagon for a 2015 Honda Accord.

“That old car works just fine, but think of how far car design has come in over 30 years,” one Sig official said. “That’s kind of what’s happening here with the M17. Pistol design has come a long way since the 1980s.”

The new M17 — and its smaller cousin, the M18 — is a 9mm handgun based on the ground-breaking P320 civilian pistol, which is a lot like a pistol version of a Lego set.

The M17 is built with a removable trigger module that can be inserted into new grips and mated with new barrels and slides to make a whole new handgun based on whatever the mission calls for.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
The M17 and M18 use the same polymer grip module and trigger group, with new slides and barrels for full-sized or compact models. (Photo from We Are The Mighty)

But the main difference most soldiers will notice with the M17 is the change from a double action to a striker fired operation. What that means is an end to that heavy first-shot trigger pull with much lighter follow-up pulls. With the M17, every tug of the trigger is the same — and that makes for easier training and better familiarity with the handgun during yearly qualifications, Sig officials say.

“Soldiers will have a consistent trigger pull every time they shoot the M17,” said Sig Sauer pistol product manager Phil Strader.

Also, the M17 does away with the need for a decocker, so soldiers won’t have to be taught how to drop the hammer before holstering the weapon. Now, once you’re done shooting, you simply engage the external safety and put the gun on your belt.

Shooting the M17 is a no brainer. The design of the grip encourages a natural aim and the 4.7-inch barrel provides good balance between accuracy and compactness. During quick draw-and-shoot drills engaging steel targets at 10 meters, the M17 hit the target every time, even in this amateur’s hands and without taking the time to line up the sights.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
The new M17 is lighter and simpler to use than the Beretta M9. (Photo from We Are The Mighty)

For those not used to an external safety on a striker-fired handgun, switching from safe to fire and back again takes a bit of getting used to, and lining up your grip hand thumb so that it doesn’t engage the slide released takes a few mags to drill into muscle memory.

But other than that, the M17 and M18 are pretty much as easy as any modern pistol to figure out.

The M17 also comes with glow-in-the-dark Tritium sights. The sights have a green front sight and orange rear sights to encourage proper alignment under stress, Strader said. What’s more, the M17 and M18 slides have a removable rear plate so soldiers can install Delta Point red dots optics.

All that, and the M17 is being outfitted with two extended 21-round magazines and a standard 17-rounder. The more compact M18 uses the same frame as the M17 with a size-medium grip and features a 3.9-inch barrel and shorter slide.

Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division will reportedly be the first to receive the M17, with more units following closely after. Rumor has it that the M17 and M18 have attracted the attention of the special operations community as well, with SEALs — who recently ditched their Sig P226 handguns for Glocks — particularly digging the ability to tailor the same gun to a variety of missions.

It was a tough fight that took many years, but in the end the U.S. military is poised to field an innovative, modern new handgun that makes the most of today’s technology and could give troopers a big advantage for a last ditch defense.

Articles

One of the last remaining Navajo Code Talkers just died at age 95

More than 400 Navajo Americans joined the military during World War II to transmit coded messages in their native language. The Japanese, even if they could break American codes, couldn’t decipher the Navajo tongue.


They were called Navajo Code Talkers, and one of the last few remaining code talkers – Joe Hosteen Kellwood – died Aug. 5. He was 95.

Kellwood joined the Marine Corps at 21 after he learned about their exploits during the Battle of Guadalcanal. He was sent to the 1st Marine Division as a Code Talker. But like most other servicemembers at the time, didn’t even know the program existed – it was still Top Secret.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Kellwood leads a group in the Pledge of Allegiance at a veteran’s ceremony at the Heard Museum in 2014.

In a 1999 interview with the Arizona Republic’s Betty Reid, he said he told his sister “Da’ahijigaagoo deya,” or, “I’m going to war.” He was one of 540 Navajo men that would become Marines during the war and one of around 400 that would become Code Talkers. Kellwood saw combat on Cape Gloucester, Peleliu, and Okinawa.

The Native American Marines were trained to transmit messages on the battlefields of the Pacific using Morse Code, radios, and Navajo codes. What’s unique about the Navajo language is that it uses syntax and tonal qualities that are nearly impossible for a non-Navajo to learn. The language also had no written form, and many of its letters and sounds did not have equivalents in other languages.

The Code Talkers created messages by first translating Navajo words into English, then using the first letter of each English word to decipher the meaning.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
A Navajo Code Talker relays a message on a field radio. (Marine Corps photo)

The security the Navajo provided U.S. communications was later acknowledged as being critical to winning the war. But often Native American servicemembers like Kellwood were discriminated against at home and discouraged from speaking Navajo.

“I was never scared during battles because I told Mama Water to take care of me,” Kellwood told the Arizona Republic. “We had to feel like we were bigger than the enemy in battle.”

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Joe Kellwood rides in the 2014 Phoenix Veterans Day Parade. (Photo by Lucas Carter)

The Japanese never broke the code, but the program was never officially acknowledged until 1968, when the U.S. government declassified the program. Their unique service to the war effort was first recognized by President Ronald Reagan in 1982.

According to his obituary, Kellwood’s awards include the Congressional Silver Medal; a Presidential Unit Citation; Combat Action Ribbon; a Naval Unit Commendation; Good Conduct; the American Campaign Medal; the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal and (of course) the WWII Victory Medal.

There are now fewer than 20 Navajo Code Talkers left.

President Reagan declared Navajo Code Talkers’ Day to be August 14th, which coincides with V-J Day, 1945 – the day Japan surrendered to the Allies and World War II officially ended.

Articles

This is how many of some of the most heroic WW2 planes are left

According to a 2014 report by USA Today, 413 World War II vets die each day on average. However, the men (and women) who served in uniform are not the only things vanishing with time.


Many of the planes flown in World War II are also departing one by one from the skies.

In one sense, it may not be surprising – after all, World War II has been over for 72 years. But here are the production totals of some of the most famous planes: There were 20,351 Spitfires produced in World War II. Prior to a crash at a French air show near Verdun in June, there were only 54 flying. That’s less than .3 percent of all the Spitfires ever built.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Spitfire LF Mk IX, MH434 being flown by Ray Hanna in 2005. The Spitfire served with the USAAF in the Mediterranean Theater from 1942-1944. (Photo from Wikimedia Commons)

Of the over 15,000 US P-51 Mustangs built, less than 200 are still flyable – about one percent of the production run. Of 12,571 F4U Corsairs built, roughly 50 are airworthy. Of 3,970 B-29 Superfortresses built, only two are flying today.

Much of this is due to the ravages of time or accidents. The planes get older, the metal gets fatigued, or a pilot makes a mistake, or something unexpected happens, and there is a crash.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Fifi, one of only two flying Boeing B-29 Superfortresses. (Photo by Ilikerio via Wikimedia Commons)

Finding the spare parts to repair the planes also becomes harder – and more expensive – as time passes. A 2016 Air Force release noted that it took 17 years to get the B-29 bomber nicknamed “Doc” flyable. Kansas.com reported that over 350,000 volunteer hours were spent restoring that B-29.

Many of the planes built in World War II were either scrapped or sold off – practically given away – when the United States demobilized after that conflict.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
P-47 P-51 — Flying Legends 2012 — Duxford (Photo by Airwolfhound)

As David Campbell said in “The Longest Day” while sitting at the bar, “The thing that’s always worried me about being one of the few is the way we keep on getting fewer.” Below, you can see the crash of the Spitfire at the French air show – and one of the few flyable World War II planes proves how true that statement is beyond the veterans.

Articles

America’s Navy commander in Asia has some tough talk for Kim Jong-un

The commander of the US Pacific Fleet and South Korea’s defense minister said they agreed to prepare a “practical military response plan” to what Adm. Scott Swift described as Pyongyang’s “self-destructive” acts, following the country’s sixth nuclear test.


Swift, who oversees 200 ships and submarines, 1,180 aircraft, and more than 140,000 sailors, also said the US Navy plans to deploy strategic assets, including a carrier strike group, to the peninsula, Yonhap reported.

Defense Minister Song Young-moo welcomed the proposal, and requested the Pacific Fleet commander play a pivotal role for peace and stability on the Korean peninsula, according to the report.

“If there’s a desire to have another carrier and there’s a desire to have more ships, more submarines, we have the capability and capacity to support that direction,” Swift said.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Adm. Scott H. Swift, the commander of U.S. Pacific Fleet, speaks to Sailors during an all-hands call. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jermaine M. Ralliford

The US naval commander described the US-South Korea alliance as “ironclad” and told reporters in Seoul that North Korea’s provocations will not weaken bilateral ties.

“If [Kim Jong Un] is trying to separate the alliances and the allegiances that we have in the region, it’s having the opposite [effect],” Swift said.

Concern had been rising in South Korea after US President Donald Trump tweeted a criticism of South Korea’s North Korea policy, calling the approach “appeasement.”

 

Trump later tweeted he is “allowing Japan  South Korea to buy a substantially increased amount of highly sophisticated military equipment from the United States,” a day after the White House said the president had approved the purchase of “many billions of dollars’ worth of military weapons and equipment from the United States by South Korea.”

On Sept. 5, Swift dismissed reports of a US-South Korea rift, calling any relationship between two countries “multidimensional.”

Song and Swift said North Korea’s nuclear test was an “unacceptable provocation” that poses a grave threat to peace and security in the Asia Pacific as well as the world.

The provocation also further isolates North Korea and places more hardship on ordinary North Koreans, they said.

MIGHTY SPORTS

Here are some tips to prevent ACFT injuries

Over the past year, a selected set of Army units have been piloting the new six-test Army Combat Fitness Test as the first phase of replacing the three-test Army Physical Fitness Test.

Used since 1980, the APFT includes the 2-mile run, push-up test, and sit-up test. The ACFT is an almost hour-long series of the six tests described in Table 1: the dead lift, the standing power throw, the hand-release push up, the sprint-drag-and-carry, the leg tuck hold, and the 2-mile run.

The ACFT is designed to better assess soldiers’ abilities to perform common tasks that reflect combat readiness. “It’s much more rigorous, but a better test,” agreed several members of the units testing the ACFT. Some studies are still underway, but transition to the ACFT is imminent:


The ACFT will be conducted by all soldiers Army-wide starting Oct. 1, 2019. Soldiers will also conduct the APFT as the official test of record during a one-year transition until Oct. 1, 2020. While some aspects of standards, training, and administration are being finalized, procedures and techniques are documented in Field Manual (FM) 7-22, Army Physical Readiness Training (PRT), 2012.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?

Capt. Jerritt Larson, executive officer, 401st Army Field Support Battalion-Kuwait performs the “maximum deadlift” element of the new US Army Combat Fitness Test.

(Photo by Kevin Fleming, 401st AFSB Public Affairs)

The ACFT and associated training requires soldiers to use several parts of the body not previously addressed by the APFT. This supports a more holistic, balanced approach to Army physical readiness. While ACFT is intended to improve soldiers’ physical performance while reducing injuries long term, as with any new physical activity it comes with new injury risks.

Observations by Army experts suggest certain injuries that may be anticipated. While the Army is sending out ACFT trainers to every unit to help train soldiers, everyone should be aware of potential new problems and how to avoid them.

Why and how were new ACFT tests selected?

Leaders and soldiers alike have long expressed concerns that the APFT doesn’t adequately measure soldiers’ abilities to perform common required tasks important during deployment.

Not all aspects of the APFT are bad, however. Studies have demonstrated that the 2-mile run is an excellent way to test soldiers’ cardiorespiratory endurance, also known as aerobic fitness. Aerobic capacity is linked to performance of more military tasks than any other aspect of fitness.

“Aerobic capacity is the most important measure of a soldier’s fitness,” says Dr. Bruce Jones, a retired Army colonel and medical doctor with the U.S. Army Public Health Center. “And weight-bearing physical activities such as running or marching are inescapable routine military aerobic activities.” Jones also explains that “Poor run times are not only associated with poor performance, they are associated with higher risk of injury.” So the 2-mile run time is a reliable way to monitor both aerobic fitness and injury risk.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?

U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Danny Gonzalez, Recruiting and Retention Command, New Jersey Army National Guard, carries two 40-pound kettlebells during the Army Combat Fitness Test.

(New Jersey National Guard photo by Mark C. Olsen)

The push-up test is also linked to key military tasks, and is a good measure of upper body muscle endurance. However, evidence did not support the value of using the sit-up test to measure military task performance.

An in-depth review of key fitness elements and their association with military tasks found that muscle strength and power are critical to military task performance. Agility and speed are also very important. The APFT does not measure these key fitness elements. The ACFT will now ensure soldiers’ combat readiness determinations include these additional fitness components.

What injury risks are associated with the ACFT?

Historically, the majority of soldiers’ injuries have occurred in the lower body, which includes the knee, lower leg, ankle, and foot and the lower back. Excessive physical training emphasis on distance running and long foot marches have been to blame.

“While lower body injuries may be reduced with more cross-training, they are expected to remain a primary concern,” explained Tyson Grier, an APHC kinesiologist. “Soldiers spend the majority of their time on their feet. Their lower body is constantly absorbing forces from carrying their body weight in addition to other loads.”

The Army updated its training doctrine to the physical readiness training program in 2012 to reduce lower body injuries. The PRT deemphasizes distance running and encourages a mix of training activities to promote strength, agility, balance, and power.

The PRT has been associated with a reduction of injuries in initial entry training. Army operational units have not shown comparable trends in injury reduction, however. Since the APFT has continued to be the test of record these units may not have fully embraced the PRT.

With the implementation of the ACFT, the Army will still monitor soldiers’ aerobic fitness with the 2-mile run, but training time will need to be devoted to a variety of other activities too. The new tests are not risk-free, but the goal is to slowly build up the body’s ability to perform activities than might cause soldiers injuries on the job. While this is to enhance physical performance, Army experts recognize that the training for and conduct of the ACFT could also increase risk of injuries to the upper body such as the back and spine, shoulder, and elbows.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?

Sgt. Traighe Rouse, 1-87IN, 1BCT10MTN, carries two 40 pound kettle bells during the A 250-Meter Sprint, Drag and Carry event of the new Army Combat Fitness Test.

(U.S. Army photo by SSG James Avery)

Some items used for the ACFT, such as the trap/hex bar for the deadlift, have been specifically selected to reduce injury risk. To avoid injuries caused by excessive weight lifts, the maximum weight for the deadlift was limited to 340 pounds, considered a moderate weight by serious lifter. Procedures are designed to avoid injury. For example, the grader must spot the soldier during leg tuck to reduce falling injury. A required warm up before the ACFT and a specific deadlift warm up period will reduce injuries. Despite these efforts, there will be a learning curve.

“A primary reason for injury resulting from the new test and training activities will be due to improper form and technique,” says Grier. “These are new activities to learn. It is very important that soldiers learn proper technique from the start, and avoid developing bad habits.”

“We also worry that “too much too soon” will cause injuries,” notes Maj. Timothy Benedict., Army physical therapist. “Some soldiers will start this training by lifting too much weight, conducting too many repetitions, or not allowing days of rest between sessions that stress specific muscles.”

While only future surveillance of soldiers’ injuries will be able to identify actual changes to the Army’s injury trends, a review of existing evidence suggests potential injury risks associated with the new tests and associated training. Table 1 highlights key injury concerns.

Some injuries associated with the ACFT will be sudden acute injuries. Acute injuries are usually associated with sudden sharp pain and typically require immediate medical attention. These include strains or tears in arm, shoulder, chest, or back muscles, torn knee ligaments, dislocated shoulders, herniated discs in the back, pinched nerves, or fractured bones (such as from falling during the leg tuck).

While these acute injuries can occur when soldiers are conducting military tasks or other personal activities, specific training activities may raise the risk. For example, studies of both professional and amateur and weightlifters and power lifters have indicated that use of extremely heavy weights during the dead-left is associated with lower back disc herniation and knee injuries. On the other hand, some rehabilitation studies have suggested that using lighter weights during the dead-lift may be useful to strengthen the back and knees.

An acute tear of fatigued muscles and tendons in the chest, arm, or shoulder during bench-pressing of heavy weights, such as a pectoralis major rupture, is another highly studied injury. This injury is almost uniquely associated with the bench press activity — only a couple past military cases were other causes (parachuting and push-up training). Though the bench press is not part of the ACFT, there is concern that soldiers may use this activity to train for the ACFT.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?

Pfc. Tony Garcia, an infantryman with 2nd platoon, Company C, 2nd Battalion, 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, pumps out pushups during a ranger physical fitness test.

(U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Joshua Ford)

Injuries that develop gradually over time from over training are known as cumulative or overuse injuries. Overuse injuries occur when a repeatedly used set of body tissues haven’t had adequate time to heal and rebuild. “Continuing to stress tissues already injured from improper or excessive use or weight will only make the condition worse,” warns Benedict.

While delayed muscle soreness can be a normal sign that muscles are rebuilding stronger, pain in a joint or bone is not normal. Pain associated with overuse injuries may dull during the activity, but can become more serious if use continues.

Overuse injuries to the lower body are the most common type of soldier injury. Overuse to joints in shoulders, elbows, as well as knees and spinal joints are concerns because of the new ACFT tests. A common shoulder overuse injury is a torn rotator cuff – though it can occur suddenly, tissues have often already been worn from excessive use. Other common overuse injuries include tendonitis, bursitis, and pain syndromes in the knee and the lower back. These injuries may lead to long term chronic or permanent tissue damage.

Why it matters

Though injuries will continue to be experienced by soldiers — most are preventable.

Injury can mean out of commission for some time — and can notably increase your chances of getting injured again. Or develop chronic life-long conditions as you get older.

Injuries critically impact individual, units, and Army performance. Injuries cost the Army billions of dollars annually for medical treatment, rehabilitation and re-training, medical disability, and reduced productivity from restricted duties, and attrition. Training-related musculoskeletal injuries are the leading reason for temporary medical non-deployment status.

What you can do

In order to optimize U.S. military performance, soldiers and Leaders must do their part to train smarter which includes avoiding injury.

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” So do what you can to avoid getting injured in the first place. Table 2 provides some general guidance. Using proper technique, slowly building up intensity and weight levels to acclimate your body, and allowing rest days between similar activities are the primary keys to minimizing your risk.

To minimize risk follow procedures as taught by Army ACFT trainers. Seek guidance from Army Fitness Centers, doctrine in FM 7-22, a certified trainer, such as a Master Fitness Trainer, and use a buddy system during training to be warned of poor form and for hands on help as a ‘spotter’ to ensure proper balance and range of motion.

And if you are injured? Stop activities at early signs of pain and seek medical advice. Taking a break from activities temporarily to let the tissues heal can minimize the likelihood of a more serious injury. An injured knee can require weeks or months of rehabilitation. A worn rotator cuff tear can mean surgery. Lower back pain can result in a long term health condition.

This article originally appeared on United States Army. Follow @USArmy on Twitter.

Articles

The Coast Guard wants to be the face of America in the South China Sea

The U.S. Coast Guard is ready to meet the Chinese military head on – but in a very Coast Guard way.


Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
A member of Maritime Safety and Security Team San Diego stands safety watch aboard a 45-foot response boat-medium from Station Honolulu while participating in an exercise with French navy Floreal-class frigate FS Prairial (F 731), during Rim of the Pacific Exercise 2016. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Melissa E. McKenzie)

Related: This is what a war between China and Japan would look like 

China claims sovereignty over a number of disputed islands in the South China Sea, and most of those claims are not recognized by international law. The U.S. Navy, under the guise of its mission to maintain freedom of navigation of the seas, regularly steams through these waters.

The Chinese consider these missions provocative. In October 2016, the guided missile destroyer USS Decatur sailed past the Paracel Islands – shadowed by three Chinese ships.

Beijing always threatens to respond to missions like these.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Chinese sailors travel in rigid hull inflatable boats while participating in a visit, board, search and seizure exercise between China, Indonesia, France and the United States, during Rim of the Pacific 2016. (Chinese navy photo by Wenxuan Zhuliang)

Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Paul Zukunft thinks the freedom of navigation missions can be done much more diplomatically and he thinks the Coast Guard is the way forward.

“Look at China’s Coast Guard, it really is the first face of China,” Admiral Zukunft told Voice of America. “I would look at providing resources to provide the face of the United States behind a Coast Guard ship.”

The bright, white-hulled ships of the Coast Guard are much more familiar to Chinese soldiers and sailors.

“The U.S. Coast Guard has a very good relationship with the Chinese Coast Guard, with each side frequently boarding the other’s ships to carry out joint maritime law enforcement activities,” he said.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Coast Guard members participate in a counter-piracy exercise with Chinese sailors from Chinese navy multirole frigate Hengshui (572) aboard the Coast Guard Cutter Stratton (WMSL 752), during Rim of the Pacific exercise 2016. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Loumania Stewart)

There’s actually a – no kidding – Coast Guard arms race in the region underway.

Using lightly-armed Coast Guard ships might actually be better for diffusing tensions in the area, instead of using heavily-armed conventional naval forces. Even China’s massive new Coast Guard supercutters will not have heavy armaments.

Zukunft added that the U.S. Coast Guard also could help Vietnam, Indonesia, and other countries in the area develop maritime capabilities while keeping peace and security.

MIGHTY TRENDING

‘Godzilla vs Kong’ trailer pits two legendary heroes against each other

“These are dangerous times. Godzilla is out there hurting people and we don’t know why,” announces Coach Taylor Kyle Chandler. While both Godzilla and King Kong are normally good guys (albeit dangerous and destructive good guys), we’re going to see what has prompted The Zill to attack in the latest trailer.

“There’s something provoking him that we’re not seeing here,” observes Stranger Things’ Millie Bobby Brown. When two heroes clash, there’s always a reason. The trailer hints at a war while lore suggests an ancient evil. Check it out to get your first glimpse at the latest monster-clash.

These are hard times. Watch the Godzilla vs. Kong trailer. Treat yourself.

“Legends collide in Godzilla vs. Kong as these mythic adversaries meet in a spectacular battle for the ages, with the fate of the world hanging in the balance. Kong and his protectors undertake a perilous journey to find his true home, and with them is Jia, a young orphaned girl with whom he has formed a unique and powerful bond. But they unexpectedly find themselves in the path of an enraged Godzilla, cutting a swath of destruction across the globe. The epic clash between the two titans—instigated by unseen forces—is only the beginning of the mystery that lies deep within the core of the Earth.”

– Warner Bros. Pictures official statement

In 2017, we saw an adolescent Kong in Kong: Skull Island where he was about 104 feet — his largest height to date. Now, he’s Godzilla-sized (almost 400 feet) and ready to throw some punches. 

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?
Literally.

Remember, Skull Island took place in the 70s. According to producer Mary Parent (a producer in both the Kong and Pacific Rim franchises), Kong has had time to grow. “Kong’s god on the island, but the devils live below us,” said John C. Reilly’s Skull Island character. “You don’t want to wake up the big one.”

“There was a war and they’re the last ones standing,”

If you need a refresher, here’s a quick one-liner since the 2014 Godzilla reboot (spoilers for recent Godzilla and Kong films ahead):

Godzilla (2014 film): Godzilla, a prehistoric alpha predator, battles a nuclear-reactor fed MUTO (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism) and its mate, a bigger wingless MUTO. After defeating them, Godzilla returns to the sea.

Kong: Skull Island (2017 film): In 1973, a U.S. government-operated mission to search for primeval creatures on Skull Island reveals Kong, the last of his kind, who protects the island from predators including T-Rex and Skullcrawlers, subterranean reptilian creatures. The team dissolves when one faction tries to kill Kong while the other recognizes his intelligence and good nature. A Skullcrawler awakens, but Kong destroys him while the survivors flee, leaving Kong behind.

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019 film): Terrorists awaken “Titans” like Rodan and the three-headed “Monster Zero” in order to destroy humans and heal the earth from their destruction. “Monster Zero” turns out to be King Ghidorah, a prehistoric alien seeking to terraform Earth. He awakens other Titans around the planet. Meanwhile, Mothra — one of Godzilla’s traditional allies — emerges and helps Godzilla defeat Ghidorah through her sacrifice. The remaining Titans then bow to Godzilla, while the end credits show the Titans helping to heal the planet and ancient cave paintings of Godzilla and Kong in battle.

The next chapter will debut in theaters and on HBO Max on March 26, 2021. The trailer makes it pretty hard not to watch.

Could USS San Antonio be the basis for BMD’s future?

“Who bows to who?’

Do Not Sell My Personal Information