This time -- and a nice confirmation of my sourcing on the first equipping units -- its a pic of some Rangers who'd dropped by a NASCAR event this past weekend.
The Joes from 1st Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment were honored at the Coca Cola 600 at Lowes Motor Speedway in Charlotte, NC, among other services over the Memorial Day weekend.
Take a close look at this photo and check out what's strapped over their shoulders...
...and I dig the guy who collapsed his SCAR's stock...
As the Army shifts its operational focus from Iraq to Afghanistan, the equipment needs of its soldiers have changed dramatically. Where Iraq’s battlefields were almost exclusively urban, Afghanistan is a rural country with few real cities. Iraq is astoundingly flat and stiflingly hot during much of the year; Afghanistan, is almost entirely mountainous, with a harsh winter climate.
Troops patrol Iraq’s cities in heavily armored vehicles on an extensive road network that used to be thickly seeded with IEDs. Afghanistan has few real roads, and troops patrol by foot up and down primitive mountain trails and along narrow ridgelines chasing elusive Taliban fighters.
For Afghanistan, it’s all about lightening the soldier’s load, Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, commander of PEO Soldier, told a group of reporters at Ft. Belvoir, Va. Fuller had on display a wide range of new clothing, equipment and weapons, all lighter versions of the kit soldiers took to Iraq. “Iraq was how do you stay cool. Afghanistan is how do you stay dry and warm… and every kid out there should have lighter body armor,” Fuller said.
As the Iraq war progressed, the Army added layer upon layer of armor until soldiers’ soon resembled a bomb disposal technician. The up-armoring made sense as the number one killer in Iraq was IEDs, problem was, all that armor meant troops were not very mobile, which was okay, because they didn’t really move around on foot all that much. In the mountains of Afghanistan, where IEDs are comparatively rare and brief, sharp, small-unit firefights against an elusive opponent are more common, all that body armor becomes a dangerously immobilizing burden. For Iraq, body armor was oriented to a soldier’s frontal arc, to provide protection as they barged into buildings and cleared rooms of suspected insurgents. In Afghanistan, troops are safer if they are lighter and more mobile and able to use the ground and natural features for cover.
With the tactical demands of the new battlefield foremost in mind, the Army is moving to shave almost 20 pounds off a soldier’s load by shedding the neck, groin, shoulder and side protection of the current body armor with a lightweight armor plate carrier. Lt. Col. Robert Myles, product manager for Soldier Survivability, made it clear that the plate carrier is exactly what it sounds like, it carries the Army’s ESAPI ballistic plates front and rear, it’s not an armored suit. The Army is fielding 500 of the 15 pound Modular Body Armor Vest plate carriers, currently used by Special Operations Command, to soldiers deploying to Afghanistan in the next few weeks.
The Army thinks its soldiers need a bit more protection than the special operations’ MBAV provides, Myles said. So, the service is putting a collection of new industry provided plate carriers to the test, including the MBAV and a plate carrier currently used by the Marines. Later this month, soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division and 173 Airborne Division will spend two weeks in Yuma, Az., because the terrain there closely resembles Afghanistan, testing seven different vests, doing road marches, running and simulating small unit firefights. Based on soldiers’ feedback, the Army will then select their own plate carrier, and initiate fielding up to 100,000 plate carriers beginning later this summer. All of the vests being considered carry the same ballistic plates.
It’s not only in body armor that the Army is looking to shave pounds. The service is developing a new, lightweight version of the venerable M240B 7.62mm machine gun, a soldiers’ favorite, called the M240L, acheiving a nearly 7 pound weight savings by using lightweight titanium instead of steel (lightweight titanium is so scarce that it takes nearly 12 months from ordering to get the new machine gun). The Army is also moving from brass bullet casings to stainless steel which is 20 percent lighter bullet to bullet, considering that a 30 round M4 mag weighs one pound, lighter ammo can make a big difference. Brass is also getting scarce and more costly while stainless steel is cheap and plentiful. Soldiers also get new lightweight tripods for the machine guns.
The venerable M2 .50 cal heavy machine gun (if you’ve ever seen an M2 fired its probable more accurate to call it a lightweight cannon) is also getting the weight loss treatment. The new XM806 Lightweight .50 Caliber Machine Gun that is currently in development weighs 64 pounds less than the M2 and is more accurate to boot.
Another interesting package from my favorite show on television. I know how much you like the in-depth, technical nature of Tactical Impact based on your glowing reviews of previous posts, so here's another one I thought you'd like to chew on.
Have a great weekend and stay tuned for comprehensive coverage of the Navy League's Sea Air Space exposition next week in Washington, DC. We'll be all over it like white on rice.
-- Christian
SCAR Sighting!
A colleague of mine sent me this photo today and I thought I'd share it with DT readers...
Note the buttstocks over these dudes' shoulders. I think this is the first official SCAR sighting with troops other than testers...
(NAVY PHOTO) SEAL BEACH NAVAL WEAPONS STATION, Calif. (April 15, 2009) Special warfare combatant-craft crewmen (SWCC) assigned to Special Boat Team (SBT) 12 conduct an equipment check before getting underway for a training exercise at Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Joshua T. Rodriguez.
-- Christian
Inside the Shot Heard 'Round the World
We've got some details trickling in about the specifics of the SEAL sniper shots on the pirates holding the Maersk-Alabama's captain, Richard Phillips.
The Combat Operator's Jake Allen -- not a former SEAL, but a Marine infantry officer and private military contractor and security consultant with sourcing in the Teams -- had no detailed information on the actual shot, but described the overall techniques used by the SEAL team.
First of all, multiple sources indicate this was conducted by SEAL Team VI, aka Naval Special Warfare Development Group, aka "DevGru." This is the naval equivalent of Delta Force.
Allen says the team likely were on the intel of the incident very soon after news hit the wires about the capture and were already well in advance of developing a plan to rescue Phillips before they deployed to the USS Bainbridge.
It's unclear why the team decided to parachute onto the scene under cover of darkness from a C-17 with rafts. One possibility is that this was a far more covert entry than simply landing on the destroyer via helicopter, or Allen says it could have been due to range restrictions...did the DevGru guys travel straight from Little Creek, Va.? Probably.
There was no rest and relaxation or getting rid of the jetlag for the team, Allen estimates, they were planning and rehersing shortly after arriving aboard the Bainbridge. Delay is, however, in their favor, Allen said, since food was running out, sleep was short and the weather was worsening for the ill-trained pirates who probably were beginning to realize they bit off more than they could chew.
Whether it was luck or planning, clearly the idea to tow the life boat behind the Bainbridge and reel it into closer range made a sniper takedown much more of a reasonable possibility than any other tactic, sources say. A shot of 80-90 feet -- even at night and in rolling seas -- is a cakewalk for DevGru SEALs.
"These guys can put three rounds onto the head of a quarter at that range," Allen told me.
And let's not get carried away with the sea state, says DT contributor Joe Buff. A multi-thousand ton destroyer is a pretty stable platform in any but the most tumultuous sea states and makes dialing in a shot on an admittedly tossing life raft more doable -- a smart platform for the Team to operate from.
We also have some information -- unconfirmed, though we're working on it -- about how the shots were taken and what was used. Our firearms expert Eric Poole who writes for Tactical-Life posits that the snipers were using the MK-11 .308 sniper system manufactured by Knights Armament Co. This weapons is awesome, by the way (I've shot it a few times myself) and, if this is indeed what the shooters used, would mark a major, high-profile departure from legacy thinking about sniping which holds bolt-action rifles as the Gold Standard or marksmanship.
Poole figures the DevGru frogmen removed the "overpowered" standard-issue Leupold scopes and opted for the Aimpoint CCO augmented by the PVS-14 night vision monocular. Though the SEAL version of the MK-11 Mod 0 is issued with supressors, it's unclear whether the operators used them, but I'd bet a million bucks they did.
One other question (among many) remains open...were there three shots or four? Poole reasons, and Allen and I agree, that someone had to shoot through the lifeboat window first, then fire the kill shots. My limited knowledge of ballistics leads me to believe the snipers could not rely on the effectiveness of the one window shot to actually strike the target where it was aimed based in the potential deflection of hitting that probably plastic (glass) window.
Poole, Allen and Buff agree that this operation was meticulously planned and flawlessly executed. The DevGru SEALs developed the situation (with their interagency partners in the FBI and other OGAs), planned an attack and executed when the opportunity presented itself (and I don't buy this "the captain was in danger" line the Pentagon and White House is trying to sell here...you mean to tell me Phillips hadn't had a gun pointed at his back anytime before this?)...It was a kick butt operation carried out by one of the best counterterrorist units in the world and they deserve a huge HooYah from all of us...
-- Christian
Three outta Four Ain't Bad
Navy SEALS shot and killed 3 of the 4 pirates holding Captain Richard Phillips hostage. Other pirates active in the region were quoted as saying, “The French and the Americans will regret starting this killing. We do not kill, but take only ransom. We shall do something to anyone we see as French or American from now.” Let’s hope the pirates will follow through on their threat as doing so is apparently the only way to get the civilized world to find enough of their collective spine to deal with this issue.
The taking of the Maersk-Alabama may turn out to have been a strategic mistake for the pirates in the region. At least in the short run it seems to have brought unprecedented focus onto the piracy problem and could very well have been the final straw. I, like everyone, am so pleased that Mr. Phillips is alive and well. The courage and leadership he displayed in offering himself in exchange for the release of the crew is the stuff of legends and he is to be commended for multiple acts of heroism throughout this drama. It’s hard to imagine a better outcome from an event that seemed so fraught with opportunities for disaster. The sole hostage now safely aboard a U.S. Navy ship, his crew and ship safely moored in a Kenyan port, 3 pirates dead and another in custody is what we call in the trade, ‘a good day out.’
And let’s not miss the chance to acknowledge the work done here by the U.S. Navy. They showed that when on-scene they have the resources and training to accomplish a very difficult mission. Their insurmountable challenge is to be everywhere they are needed all the time and that, of course, is simply not possible.
But while we revel in our good fortune of getting the Captain back alive let us not take our eye off the ball and miss the larger point here. These pirates attacked the Maersk-Alabama with the full knowledge that it was flagged in the U.S. and likely would contain multiple American crew members. The pirates also knew that a ship carrying the name Maersk, the largest shipping carrier on the planet, would certainly be backed by a big insurance policy whose underwriter would, in time, make a large ransom payment.
Despite the dismal outcome for this group of pirates I suspect that had the pirate quoted above held his tongue on that last sentence he likely would continue to enjoy a lot of sympathy from a range of observers. It seems these days the pirates have more support from governments, ship owners, carriers, the military, insurance companies and most everyone else. Ah, the poor Somali pirate; he grew up in a war-torn country, all he ever wanted to be was a peaceful fisherman and spend his time ashore helping old ladies across the busy streets of Mogadishu.
Here is a trivia question for you: What is the one thing most Somali’s would want more than anything? You guessed it, to leave Somalia. And what is one way many Somalis are leaving the country every day? Yep, on boats. So, it is pirates who get that chance to flea every single day. They could take their boats, load them with their families and go to any of a dozen neighboring countries just as many peaceful minded Somali refugees do every day. Just ask the Yemeni authorities how many Somali refugees are turning up on their shores every week. No these pirates are criminals by choice. For all the media condemnation against PMCs and the endless accusations of ‘wide spread’ human rights violations by ‘mercenaries’ where is the outrage against criminal pirates who openly admit that money is their sole motivation?
Ah, but these guys are only after the ransom. They don’t intend to harm anyone. This is precisely the kind of argument you will repeatedly hear from our so-called leaders in New York and London. Of course they have never and will never have a loaded gun pointed at them. Certainly not one which is being held by a untrained, uneducated and likely drug induced criminal whose only concern is ‘the money’. No these brave and noble leaders will never be forced to live in the hot and stinking hold of a ship like animals for months on end. They will be forced to live in close proximity to theirs and their fellow captives’ excrement, vomit and urine. They won’t be forced to subsist on the meager scraps of food left by their captors. But hey, that’s no problem, don’t worry, at the end of several months the ransom will probably be negotiated down to ‘a fair price’ for your life and lives of your fellow crew members and you’ll be free to go! Never mind the 20 kilos you lost in body weight and the immeasurable psychological damage done to you, to say nothing of the fear and anxiety your family was forced to live through during your captivity. Nah mate, all they wanted was the money and that’s all been paid up so the problem is sorted. Carry on...
There is of course some basic truth to the adage that money is the root of all evil. Well if not the money itself certainly the greedy pursuit of it. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with pursuing and amassing a fortune provided one follows the rules established by the laws of man along the way. However, when laws are broken, whether in the Gulf of Aden by pirates, by executives on Wall Street or bank robbers on Main Street a civilized society must enforce consequences that discourage future breaches of the law.
I really like this issue of piracy from a PMC perspective because it is a crystal clear example of the total failure of leadership, diplomacy and partnership by state actors primarily the United States but also the rest of the key players in the UN Security Council. The ‘country’ of Somalia has been without a functioning government since 1991 and the world has done very little in the way of dealing with this problem in any effective way. What’s more there is no real action being taken as we speak so there can be little hopes for improvement in the foreseeable future. In short, the world has moved on from Somalia and were it not for these pesky and annoying pirates no one in Washington or London would give a wit about it.
And if there is no attempt being made to deal with the root cause of the problem (Somalia as a failed state) the medicine being prescribed, namely military warships, is showing itself to be impotent in the extreme at preventing attacks. By their own admission the efforts placed in the Gulf of Aden have resulted in an increase in attacks off the eastern Somali coast.
There is only one solution to cure this disease and that is to fix Somalia. But that seems to be far too difficult for anyone to contemplate. So, if you cannot or will not deal with the cause of the disease you are left only to treat the symptoms and that is obviously to put enough firepower onto enough ships to raise the stakes of this game for the pirates.
Three-outta-four ain’t bad. If the next couple of gangs of pirates finds 75% of their lot killed and the remaining 25% in custody I am betting their calculations will change a bit. However, if we continue to feel sorry for these guys and turn a blind eye to the issue we are in effect reinforcing their business model and we cannot honestly be surprised when we find more of the same.
One of the aspects that amuses me about contracting is the free-flow of people between companies and contracts. It’s not uncommon to join a project and see a number of familiar faces with whom you have a shared history even if each has worked for multiple companies in the interim. The down side of this reality is that you also see a few nardowells who probably should be either in prison or committed to an institution for lunacy or just general stupidity. How does this happen? Simply stated, it’s ‘the buddy system’ that is to blame. In this business people recruit and even promote their mates in absence of, or often worse, in violation of standing company policies.
I have no problem with people hiring their friends or for that matter their family provided the people are qualified to do the job. But what gets me is when people are brought onto a contract simply because someone in a position of authority believes an applicant is ‘a good guy.’ I’ve always believed that being a solid citizen was the bare minimum for any employee and not some kind of a differentiator that should give someone the leg-up on getting a job.
As a friend of my own likes to say, “Being a nice guy does not make you the right guy.” I like that, because it implies that being likeable is important but it should never supersede the actual skills required to do the work. Most everyone would prefer to have teammates that share our interests. It just makes life in the zone better if you are surrounded by selfless team players who respect other people’s space, clean up after them selves, require no micro-management, are trustworthy and reliable, like to have a beer, talk about footy, maybe play some poker or are otherwise sociable around the dinner table. All of that is important because often we are often living together in close quarters with loaded weapons and little or no external supervision. It’s important to get along with each other. Having ‘good guys’ on the team is an important aspect of what enables a team to function. If for no other reason than, should the need arise, a guy is more likely to risk his life for a person he genuinely respects than someone he cannot tolerate. But the real question is: How often is the very existence of that life threatening situation created in the first place, at least in part, due to the poor technical or tactical proficiency of some idiot who despite his above average social skills should not be in the job in the first place? Of course it’s impossible to know precisely but in all the events I have seen, experienced, heard and read about the vast majority of them can be worked back to a very few people making some severely poor decisions.
Armed security is, at its core, a thinking-mans game where intellect borne of training and experience ought to be the most prized commodity. Those who are trained to do so can design security systems and services that mitigate risk in the first place and thus avoid armed conflict in many cases. In military jargon this is often called pre-kinetic or ‘left-of-bang’ meaning they are the actions taken long before an incident occurs. This is perhaps the most important and certainly the most underrated aspect of security consulting. But despite our best efforts and planning events will occur which require people to think on their feet and deal with the difficulties and complexities that constitute combat.
Wouldn’t it be great if you could take any operator from any background and like Neo, the main character in the movie The Matrix, simply plug his brain into a computer and in seconds upload all the necessary training and decision making criteria in a batch of digital files? Yeah that would be cool but here in the real world we are a long way from that. Not only can we not do it automatically, most PMCs don’t even try to do it manually. The absence of documented processes/procedures and intense repetitive training (and believe me there is a massive absence of both among most PMCs) means that companies are betting their entire future on the decision making skills of their lowest paid employees.
But all operators are not equal despite the fact that the company may see them as interchangeable widgets each with the same fixed operating cost. I often counsel anyone who will listen that the greatest commodity in our business is people. Contracts change hands all the time but the people on the ground hold the company’s reputation and with it their future in the palm of their hands every single day. In a business where a single poor decision by just one employee can result in loss of life, the smearing of the company’s brand and the loss of millions of dollars in revenue. It’s puzzling to see how little effort most PMCs put into finding and retaining the best people. Especially when you consider that when your best people leave to work for a competitor it has the two-fold impact of lowering the previous company’s service quality while simultaneously increasing that of their competitor.
I really don’t see people as good/bad, young/old, smart/dumb, I simply see them as trained…ready, or untrained and thus unready. Sure, most operators are ‘trainable’ but that implies that you have time between the impending moment-of-truth and the completion of said training. Do you? You can always train someone tomorrow but what if the moment-of-truth comes in the next 5 minutes, or after lunch or tonight at midnight? Is he ready? Is your company ready to deal with the consequences of his lack of readiness?
‘Good people’ are worth their weight in gold if the definition of ‘good’ includes more than social skills. I, for one, would rather work with cantankerous and grumpy teammates who are tactically switched-on than guys who are agreeable in camp but useless when the bees start buzzing.
I’d like to see companies adopt lucrative referral programs that reward referring parties when the new-hire is a success but also sack the referring party when the referred person does not perform to standard. Of course this implies that the company has a standard to begin with...I’ll leave that for another day. The point is that people should think hard about who they endorse. Were that the case the overriding criteria for employment would return to where it belongs and that is in the realm of training, experience and real-world capabilities.
Leave a comment letting me know if you agree or disagree.
I just love this new show that's featured on my hunting channels called "Tactical Impact" -- though my wife gives me un-ending grief for watching it. Not sure if you've heard about it, but it's a pretty good resource on high-speed operations, weapons, equipment, tactics and history.
It's headlined by Aaron Roberts and Larry Vickers. Roberts is a former special operations Soldier and top trainer at Blackwater, while Vickers was a Delta operator for years and now runs a training company called Vickers Tactical. I spoke with Larry at the SHOT show about Tactical Impact and he said they renewed for another season and had a full slate of programs.
I like it because the peel away the layers of combat tactics to give you whys -- not just the hows. And I especially like the segment "choose your weapon" where they lay out a specific combat scenario (this week's was the Green Beret team tasked with crash landing into the center of the Son Tay prison in Vietnam) and give you three weapons to choose from to take on the mission. They then go through each one and explain why they'd choose what they did (I always choose the AK-47 even if they don't give me that option).
Well, the producers have been kind enough to post some of the show's segments online, and I share a pretty cool one with you now.
Happy Friday everyone!
-- Christian
US Hopes to Set Piracy Precedent With Polaris Case
[Here's a teaser of a story we'll be running tomorrow morning on Military.com]
The U.S. Coast Guard is using the recent capture of seven pirates in the Gulf of Aden as a test case of how to pursue swashbucklers worldwide and submit them to international courts.
According to key officials with the Coast Guard, maritime security experts and military commanders are examining a variety of ways to secure ships transiting through the East African waters and provide some semblance of order the largely lawless region between Yemen and Somalia.
"We're focused on providing what we call a 'consequence delivery system,' " said Capt. Chuck Michel, head of the Coast Guard's office of Maritime and International Law. "In the absence of the territorial sovereign standing up, what we're trying to set up is some kind of legal mechanism to make it more painful for the pirates to actually go out and do their activities."
Michel said the capture by the Navy of seven pirates who tried to take over the Marshall Islands-flagged MV Polaris Feb. 11 is a "test run" of the mechanism that the U.S. military would use in the future to deter more piracy.
"The whole follow-on train that follows once you grab these individuals to actually getting them behind bars is an excruciating process," Michel added during a Feb. 17 interview with military bloggers.
It is getting very tiresome to continue hearing operators in our community complain about how the ’left wing media’ the ’muckrakers’ the ‘liberals’ the ‘the blogosphere’ and their ‘pacifist do-gooder agenda’ are bringing our industry down and giving us a bad name. Anyone who sits around whining about books or articles or blogs or news reports that attack PMCs should stop wasting their breath and start doing something about it.
Yes, it’s true there are dozens of traditional media outlets that say negative things about us. Yes, there are many reporters who wake up every day with a pre-written story in their head about how bad PMCs are. And yes, in the most powerful battle, the battle of words, they are dominating the fight for ‘mindshare’ among politicians and the general citizenry. But guess what, it has been and always will be this way. And if you as an industry professional don’t get engaged it will remain so.
It can be frustrating at times but it does not help to complain about it. It’s akin to complaining about the sun rising every morning. Just get used to it and learn to protect yourself from it. In fact, the media’s perception much like the sun is highly predictable and therefore very easy to diffuse or to counter or to mitigate. We as an industry must learn how to adapt to the environment we live in, not to wish for an environment that will never exist.
When the sun rises each day you can do a whole host of things to continue to operate effectively not only against it but with it. On the one hand you can smear your naked body in butter and layout down on an asphalt parking lot. But don’t bitch and moan about the sun’s power when you get burned to a crisp. It was not the sun’s fault. You made poor choices and took dumb actions. The sun is all powerful, and in many ways sometimes “the media” feels like it is also has monolithic power. But what most fail to see is that if you are smart enough the sun’s raw power can be harnessed and used to great positive effect. With a mirror or a magnifying glass for example it can be used to deflect the harsh rays away from something and focus them onto something else.
“The media” as such is simply a tool. Actually, it is not a tool (singular) it is a whole box of tools (plural). And the beauty of this modern-day toolbox is that no one owns the box itself or the tools inside; they are free-to-use. Today anyone can write an eBook, anyone can write and publish their own paper book, anyone can publish a magazine, anyone can publish an ezine, anyone can write a blog post, anyone can comment on other peoples blogs, anyone can make a speech, anyone can start a podcast, and anyone can start a radio program and broadcast it via the internet or even on satellite channels. The days of limitation put in place by big publishing houses or government control over the airwaves are long gone. It’s time the PMC industry wake up and started using these tools to our advantage. This is the primary reason I started TCO and I have consistently called on the community to contribute. I have reached out to my personal network and to people who I have never met and the response with a few notable exceptions has been, well, disappointing so say the least.
If your the kind of sod who sits around complaining about the media’s treatment of Blackwater but you do nothing to stand up for them in public then your not worthy of being a professional private soldier or security guard. You’re just a pathetic little mouse scared of your own shadow and you will always be scrapping to feed on the crumbs left for you by greater more brave men.
At Defense Tech, we're always trying to bring to our readers news and information that directly impacts your daily lives. Whether it's the geopolitics of Russian relations with India, the budgetary hurdles of yet another troubled Pentagon program or a new pouch or holster, we want to make sure you have the information you need to help make informed decisions in your professional endeavours.
That's not to say we want to shy away from healthy debate. In fact, DT is the place for raucous conversations about today's pressing national security issues. And we want to do more of that too.
In that vein, I want to introduce a new contributor to the blog who's an expert in an area that has exploded in recent years and caused quite a bit of controvery of its own.
Jake Allen is a security contractor and consultant, a former Marine infantry officer and a veteran of several years of work in Iraq as a civilian PSD operator. He's got more stories he can't tell stored in the tip of his pinky finger than we might acquire in a lifetime.
Late last year he introduced a new e-newsletter called "The Combat Operator" that chronicles the weekly news and developments of the private military company world. It's a great resource on its own, but Jake also hosts a kick ass podcast (Combat Operator Radio) that he hosts on his Web site but is also available on iTunes.
We're going to post some of Jake's content, get some exclusives from him and keep in touch with him via blogcast and podcast from here on out to keep tabs on what's happening in the PMC world.
So without further ado, here's some of Jake's thoughts on Blackwater losing its State Dept. contract:
Blackwater will not have their license renewed by the Iraqi Ministry of the Interior. And to kick them while they are down the moral cowards at the U.S. State Department (DoS) are now indicating that they will not renew Blackwater's task order for the global WPPS (Worldwide Personal Protective Services) contract which ends in May of this year. So instead of losing simply one AO, albeit the largest, Blackwater are now faced with loosing their most lucrative client altogether.
Blackwater's reaction to these foregone conclusions was predictable. Did they get out in front of this story by offering even a shadow of contrition and evidence of the lessons they had learned. Did they shuffle their management or illustrate any improvements to their operational leadership, governance or oversight? No. In fact, have they ever fessed-up to even the possibly, possibility mind you, that their unprecedented and explosive growth in mission-scope and thus manpower might have, just might have, been the source of some problems? Uhh...No. Have they ever acknowledged that some, just some, no matter how small a percentage of their work force, might have committed mistakes? Note: I did not say crimes I said mistakes. The answer is: No, no and double-no. As far as anyone at Blackwater is concerned the entire organization from Erik Prince down to the lowest FNG are completely and utterly devoid of any wrongdoing. It's all a witch-hunt fuelled by the left wing media with their liberal pacifist agenda.
If that seems a little hard to believe that's because it is. Instead of owning up to and dealing with an 'acceptable' level of corporate mistakes and then offering to be part of the solution Blackwater decided a long time ago to be unapologetic, obstinate, opaque, obstructive and arrogant. True to form, and like a spoiled child, last week they offered to leave Iraq on 72-hours notice. It was not an offer as much as it is a thinly veiled threat designed to punish the DoS and in the process hold hostage the U.S.'s foreign policy capabilities in the region. The DoS deserves to be held hostage since it was they who allowed one PSC to have a disproportionate amount of the WPPS contract. Had they more equitably divided the work among 4 to 5 companies the loss of one would not be as catastrophic.
Honestly, the level of hubris on display here by Prince is on par with Jeffrey Skilling of Enron infamy who, down to the last minute, insisted Enron made no mistakes and the whole scandal was simply the media out to get them because they were so smart, innovative and successful.
OK. Before I go any further on this little diatribe I feel obligated to make a few declarations.
I am a passionate proponent for not only a strong private security sector I am one of only a handful of people who openly advocate for private militaries and their use on the offensive to resolve conflicts in places which are witnessing widespread human suffering due to insecurity. I am no left-wing pacifist.
I am not against Blackwater as a company, an institution or as a concept. In fact I ardently support exactly what they should be standing for and doing. I just don't support what they actually are doing or how they have done it.
I am deeply disappointed by what Blackwater has done to our industry at large and for the repercussions all operators will have to deal with as a result of their performance. You can bet the first poor expat operator who faces an Iraqi court will have to bear the brunt of an entire countries hatred for contractors. Not to mention the increase in stringent regulations which are surely around the corner. More badges, more personal disclosure of information to the Iraqi authorities, more forfeiture of rights, the list goes on.
I am simply pointing out that all organizations, in every instance, ultimately take on the beliefs and the image of their leaders. If you don't believe me pick a history book and read about the likes of Winston Churchill, Adolf Hitler, Julies Caesar, Lee Iacocca, Jack Welch, Ken Lay, etc, etc, etc...whether good or bad it starts and ends at the top.
I always approach issues like this from the instruction I received as young officer in the Marine Corps. USMC doctrine teaches that "A leader is responsible for everything his troops do or fail to do." Full stop. No excuses. It won't be the enemy's fault, the media's fault, a private's fault or a senior NCO's fault. If it goes bad, as the leader and the officer you own it. Either you were not smart enough or present enough as a leader to see the problem developing or you were too weak as a leader to fix when it did develop. If disaster struck it was because you either failed to provide the foresight or the oversight. Don't look left and don't look right. Look strait into the mirror. I apply that unapologetically high standard to myself and I apply it to Blackwater's leadership at all levels from the President of the company down to the Team Leaders and the Vehicle Commanders have failed.
This is probably a good time to make it clear that Blackwater's ranks are filled, filled I tell you, with hundreds of good, honest, solid, hard working operators who are also technically and tactically at the top of their game. And when many of these operators turn up over at outfits like Triple Canopy or Dyncorp those organizations will benefit from their contribution. However, there is a certain minority of Blackwater staff and contractors who should be screened for poor personal and professional judgement and decision-making. Those should not be offered the chance to cross-deck to another firm.
You guys might remember that I mentioned I'd met the folks from Milspecmonkey at the SHOT Show a couple weeks ago in Orlando.
We've run a couple of their gear reviews in the past and I like their "next-gen operator" approach to things. Milspecmonkey has a keen eye for the innovative companies out there finding real solutions to the needs of troopers in combat and on the job.
Well, we're going to build on that earlier relationship and offer up some of the videos the boys shot at the show this year.
As you know they are (and so am I) a big fan of the guys at Magpul. Here are a few of the vids Milspecmonkey shot on new products being released by Magpul...maybe this'll give some of the boys in "supply" a few ideas to make a Joe's life a bit more bearable.
Here's a look at some new Magpul M4 add-ons...
The Monkey takes a look at some more accessories...
...and Magpul explains why bigger is better
-- Christian
Combat Optics Evolve with the Fight
From the rolling heights of Bunker Hill, to the wispy sands of Desert Storm, the American military marksman has been relying on training, guts and iron to put his bullet on target.
But in the combat zones of today, simple marksmanship using "iron sites" built into the rifle has all but vanished, replaced with video-game-like red dot scopes illuminating bad guys at ranges only the sharpest of shooters could hit in the past.
The war in Iraq introduced an explosion in the use of so-called "combat optics" with both the Army and Marine Corps introducing small scopes mounted on M-16s and M-4s as standard issue to all troops.
Marksmanship experts both inside and outside the services say the new sights are reliable, easy to use and make even the worst shooter far more accurate than traditional iron sights do.
The Marine Corps has issued the Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight from Wixom, Mich.-based Trijicon, to its riflemen, giving grunts a four-times magnified view of a target illuminated by a red "carrot" that the manufacturer says can range up to 800 yards.
The Army issued a similar sight to some of its units in combat, but plans to field a new optic from Chantilly, Va.-based Aimpoint that doesn't have the magnification of the Trijicon ACOG, a company official said.
"In an urban combat situation like we're seeing these days, the magnification gets in the way," Aimpoint pro staff member Brian Garrett told Military.com at the 2009 SHOT Show in Orlando.
But with the proliferation of combat optics on the battlefield and huge government contracts in the works, manufacturers aren't sitting on their hands.
Aimpoint's marketing and business development chief, Brian Lisankie, said his company has miniaturized the current Army optic, reducing the length of the newly-issued "COMPM4" sight from nearly five inches to little more than two inches long.
They've also increased battery life of the COMPM4 to 70,000 hours of continuous use, recognizing that Joes sometimes forget to turn the LED powered reticule off when not in use. The smaller, Micro T-1 boasts a 50,000 life span on one battery.
"It doesn't do a Soldier any good to sight in on a target and not have the thing working," Garrett said. "This one is 'turn it on and leave it on.' "
Lisankie said Aimpoint is experimenting with a new sight that combines a laser range finder within the optic. All a shooter would need to do is press a button, range the target and a box would appear that showed where to aim.
"It's already demonstrated unusually high hit probability," Lisankie said, adding the new sight, dubbed the BR-8, would be particularly useful for M203 grenadiers who often have to lob their round onto a target.
And Aimpoint isn't alone in their combat optic innovation.
One of the most popular optics among the special operations forces is the EOTech SU-231 holographic sight. Diverging from Aimpoint's use of LED lights to illuminate the reticule, EOTech instead employs an eye-safe laser diode to light the dot.
Some operators prefer the EOTech sight because it has a wide, square housing rather than a tubular one, making it easier to pick up a target for a quick shot, said EOTech director of product management, John Bailey.
But the EOTech sights come with a disadvantage, he admitted. The laser diode that lights the optic's internal reticule sucks power, limiting battery life of the SU-231, for example, to 1,100 hours.
The advantage, Bailey said, is that the laser diode is more durable and allows for the reticule to display more information.
And that's where EOTech's innovation comes in. Bailey said his company is looking toward using the combat optic as a mini head's up display, working to incorporate more digital information than just a sight picture.
"We want it to evolve with the digital battlefield," he said.
Instead of Land Warriors using a helmet-mounted digital display for their GPS information or other battlefield coordination data, why not use the EOTech sight?
Bailey said that while Trijicon has the majority of the Marine Corps market locked up, his sight has found favor with the Marine Corps spec ops community and his company is set to ship a limited buy of 5,000 optics to Marine infantry units.
-- Christian
Protecting the Pooch
Just when you thought "tactical" had infiltrated every aspect of your life, something new comes along to tip it over into the semi-ridiculous.
This is essentially a MOLLE webbing rigged carrier that straps fully around the military working dog, allowing operators to use the animal as a demi-pack dog (carrying extra mags and other gear), harness him in enough to repel with the dog down a cliff and even insert Kevlar panels to protect the pooch against shrapnel and other flying debris.
As a dog lover, I was instantly hooked.
The company also offers a high-tech cooling pack that inserts into the APAC, with some high-speed cooling chemicals that can get down to near freezing after being soaked in 50-degree water, says Combat K-9 salesman Jim McGovern.
The company also has an impressive lineup of quick release collars and leashes that allow the handler to keep his attention on a threat, without having to fumble for a buckle.
Anyone who's been in Iraq or Afghanistan knows how important military working dogs are. With the hundreds of companies and booths here at SHOT Show displaying every conceivable variation of tactical gear for humans, it's nice to see at least one company paying attention to the needs of man's best friend.
-- Christian
Multicam on the Loose
I just took a closer look at the picture I used for the post on SOF surge in Afghanistan. Am I seeing what I think I'm seeing?
Here's the caption that accompanied the picture on the Army's own Web site:
Detachment in Afghanistan
Photo by Sgt. David N. Gunn
December 15, 2008
Members of Operational Detachment Alpha 3336 of the 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne) recon the remote Shok Valley of Afghanistan where they fought an almost seven-hour battle with terrorists in a remote mountainside village.
Awesome!
-- Christian
Commando Surge for The Stan
My boy Gordon Lubold called me and told my his paper, the Christian Science Monitor, finally ran his story on a surge of SF for Afghanistan and the internal debates going on within the community that the current commando force isn't being used properly, so why send more...
My take is that special operations forces are the best way to mitigate the impact of a "surge" in Afghanistan on the Afghan people. I'd rather have more culturally astute commandos rubbing shoulders with xenophobic Afghans than some specialist from the 10th Mountain Division.
Let's see how Gordon reports it...
The Pentagon is likely to send up to 20 Special Forces teams to Afghanistan this spring, part of a new long-term strategy to boost the Afghan security forces' ability to counter the insurgency there themselves.
The "surge" of elite Special Forces units would represent a multiyear effort aimed at strengthening the Afghan National Army and police units that the US sees as key to building up Afghanistan's security independence, say defense officials who asked to remain anonymous because the controversial decision has not yet been announced. The US already plans to send thousands of additional conventional forces to Afghanistan sometime next year. But it is hamstrung by limited availability since so many of those forces are still in Iraq.
The deployment of the Green Berets, the independent, multifaceted force skilled at training indigenous forces, could fill critical gaps in Afghanistan almost immediately, defense officials say....
...However, the proposal is controversial. The plan is being pushed by Lt. Gen. Doug Lute, the so-called war czar under President Bush, who is poised to release a set of recommendations for how to reverse the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan in coming days. Defense officials say General Lute believes the deployment of the Green Berets could go a long way toward making up for a significant shortfall in the number of troops needed in the region.
Yet many within the tightly knit Special Forces community say the Special Forces teams already in use in Afghanistan should be employed far more effectively before any new teams, which number about a dozen men each, are deployed.
"I just don't think it's a very good use of the units if they are not going to be doing combat advising in an effective way," says one Special Forces officer with recent experience in Afghanistan. "I don't know any Special Forces who think that's really what we need over there."
"Textbook" operations for Special Forces dictates that the 12-man teams, known as Operational Detachment Alpha teams, or ODAs, should be paired with units of at least a few hundred Afghan security force soldiers.
But in many cases, the Green Berets are paired with much smaller groups of Afghan forces, sometimes even one-on-one. In other cases, they are used to man checkpoints, say some Special Forces officers.
Critics worry that Lute's plan is to simply send more Special Forces units to Afghanistan without a coherent plan to support them. "Don't just throw ODAs out there as an answer," says another senior officer. "That's just the easy, lazy answer out there."
There are other gripes with the way the teams now deployed to Afghanistan are being used.
Too few of the Special Forces teams are partnered with Afghan forces for longer than, say, a month at a time, creating an unsustainable and unproductive training relationship that runs counter to Special Forces doctrine.
Special Forces officers blame the problems on a lack of a coherent strategy for using the Green Berets in Afghanistan. Others say some Special Forces teams operate under NATO commanders from other countries and don't know how to employ the teams properly.
Perhaps most significant, Special Forces officers and experts say it would be a waste of time and resources to send additional Special Forces teams to Afghanistan unless there is a "surge" of helicopters, remote-controlled aircraft for surveilling the enemy, and other "enablers" to allow the teams that are there now to be more effective.
Roger Carstens, a retired Special Forces officer who is now a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, a think tank in Washington, visited Afghanistan a couple months ago and asked members of the Special Forces community what they thought about "surging" Special Operations Forces.
"Everyone of them said 'no SOF surge,'" he says. "What they need is an enabler surge and enduring partnerships with Afghan military and police units," he says.
Adm. Eric Olson, the senior commander of US Special Operations Command, Tampa, Fla., is expected to convey the concerns of the special operations community to Gen. David Petraeus, the new commander of US Central Command.
The proposal would also include the creation of a new Special Forces command position, to be filled by a one-star general in Afghanistan this spring, whose job it will be to marshal resources to ensure the Special Forces units are employed properly.
The Afghan National Army, the pride of the country's budding national security apparatus, and the Afghan National Police, which is still seen as largely corrupt and weaker, need help to build up into a larger, more effective force.
Ultimately, the US would like to see at least 134,000 soldiers trained and ready to provide for their own country's security.
But trainers have been hard to come by, and the mix of foreign and US forces has muted the training effort, US defense officials say.
-- Christian
Kill bin Laden Exclusive Pics (the entire collection)
It was bitter cold. The harsh wind swept across their high mountain redoubt with only thin native blankets to shelter them from the bitter Afghan air. They were hours from resupply, carrying only what they could on their backs.
And that's just how they wanted it.
Peering through their high-tech spotting scopes and talking in low whispers to pilots above, the Delta Force operators high in the mountains of Tora Bora were warmed by the thought that they, more than anyone else in that desolate land, were killing more perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks than anyone else in the world.
For nearly a week, 40 of America's best trained, most elite Soldiers from the 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta, or "Delta Force," combed the 14,000 foot peaks with wavering Afghan militia allies to hunt down the world's most wanted man: Osama bin Laden. In a first ever account, the man who shepherded those bearded warriors into Tora Bora's thin mountain air writes of the near misses, frustrated plans and weak-kneed guerrillas that stymied their quest for al Qaeda's top commanders.
Writing under the name "Dalton Fury," the Delta Force commander -- a major at the time - gives a detailed look in "Kill bin Laden: A Delta Commander's Account of the Hunt for the World's Most Wanted Man" how the unit prepared for, planned and executed its complicated mission.
For Delta, it was an unprecedented task. A force best know for lightning-fast counterterrorism raids, long range reconnaissance and high value target snatches, the operators on the Tora Bora mission had to work a hybrid plan that combined unconventional warfare, intelligence collection, long-range logistics and close air support - all while waiting for the call to swoop down on an Osama hideout at a moment's notice.
"We went into a hellish land that was considered impregnable and controlled by al Qaeda leaders who had helped defeat the Soviet Union," Fury writes. "We killed them by the dozen. Many more surrendered. ... And we heard the demoralized -- bin Laden speak on the radio, pleading for women and children to fight for him."
"Then he abandoned them all and ran from the battlefield," Fury adds with some satisfaction. "Yes. He ran away."
(Though Defense Tech knows Fury's true name, we will honor his wishes and not reveal it here and I have updated my previous post with the redaction.)
As Fury tells it, his Delta colleagues racked up an impressive body count and thought for a while they had actually killed the al Qaeda leader or his deputy. But a reader can clearly see between the lines of "Kill bin Laden" that Fury was frustrated with his unit's lack of success in killing their key target. While dropping JDAMs on terrorist caves was gratifying, Fury never mentions a single shot fired by his operators in the entire early December 2001 engagement -- cold comfort to some of the best combat marksmen in the world who were itching for an up-close fight.
Fury is also disappointed by his commanders' reluctance to engage his operators more into the fight, mandating the reliance on Afghan militias to do most of the heavy lifting. His unit proposed two plans to corner bin Laden. One involved a backdoor, high-altitude mountaineering assault from the Pakistan border, the other called for sowing GATOR anti-personnel mines along the most likely approaches and escape routes to stymie an al Qaeda escape long enough for a commando assault.
Both plans were rejected by higher headquarters -- or the White House -- and Fury was left to the worst possible alternative: a frontal assault.
"Kill bin Laden" is one of the most detailed and informative descriptions of a battle forgotten by most Americans, but one that was truly the closest the West gotten to bin Laden since 9/11. It's not the "tell all" of Eric Haney's "Inside Delta Force" but compares well with Gary Bernsten's "Jawbreaker" in it's revelation of black ops.
And that's where Fury has bumped into the most controversy. Some in the Army Special Force community have rejected Fury for his breach of Delta's code of silence - a written and un-written rule among operators that one never speaks to outsiders of their endeavors. Credible online forums have already revealed Fury's true name, ignoring his pleas for anonymity for fear of endangering his family.
Fury declined several requests for an interview with Defense Tech to discuss this issue and details of his book.
Revealing his missions and opening Delta to the world in even this small way has earned "Kill bin Laden" scorn from portions of the special operations community. But Fury's critics never dispute his facts.
So give "Kill bin Laden" a read; the author did the American public a service by explaining to the victims of 9/11 how America tried to kill the mastermind behind that horrifying day, and it could serve to remind us all that "enemy number one" is still out there - and so is Delta, hunting him to the ends of the Earth.
-- Christian
The (Face) Paint of Darkness
The guys over at the Soldier Systems blog have a cool entry on face paints that can help a warfighter hide from enemy passive night vision systems.
Here's what they've got:
REDEYE™ and BLACKEYE™ camouflage compounds are formulated to eliminate or minimize hazardous reflected "green light" emitted from phosphorous screens on Night Vision Devices. Both of these compounds appear "invisible/black" when viewed by a passive enemy Night Vision Device.
GREENEYE™ face paint has a signature identical to green vegetation when viewed at night through a passive NVG and/or using an IR Illuminator. It also appears as green in visible light.
Now the site over at Orion Filters, which makes the NVG-beating paint, is all cagey and top secret...it takes a few steps to get to the info and I'm not sure how open the whole site really is. But the folks at Soldier Systems got the gouge somehow and if it's straight up (which usually their info is) this is a development that could have far reaching implications -- for American troops and their enemies.
It seems from Orion's write up that the face paint can help minimize the reflective light against an operator's face when he's using NVGs...and the green paint actually helps make him invisible to a vegitative backdrop.
There's already been the incorporation of "nano" fibers in Army and Marine Corps body armor that helps reduce reflectivity of ambient light, but that technology is by no means an invisible cloak. The addition of the Orion Filters face paint and other compounds, however, could help make US and allied forces truly "ghosts of the night."
Some of you wondered what this Integrated Tourniquet System Blackhawk designed was all about. So in the interest of full disclosure, I've posted their video demo on how it works.
Now, some of you wondered about the construction of the ITS into the garments. Basically, the Nylon strap that makes up the bulk of the tourniquet is pretected behind a light, soft mesh retention pouch that keeps the strap from rubbing up against the wearer's skin. This also helps keep toes and fingers from catching on the ITS straps as the operator dons the garments.
Also, keep an eye on the HPFU entry. I need to remformat some of the promotional pics that I have from my trip to Blackhawk and I'll post them once they're done.
-- Christian
UPDATED: SEALs Wearing New High-Speed Fighting Threads
With extended deployments to tough combat zones like Afghanistan and Iraq, the Marine Corps -- and more recently the Army -- (and the Navy and Air Force, though those are not as "combat" driven as the others) have revamped their uniforms used in everyday operations.
The rugged terrain, urban operations, weather extremes and austere conditions of current combat zones have prompted uniform designers to take a much closer look at other industries to find user-friendly options, materials and design innovations for their forces. Love it or hate it, the camouflage of the Army's ACU might be off track, but it would be hard to argue that the uniform isn't packed with useful features that help a Soldier get at stuff he needs to do his job. Sure, there have been some durability issues with the stitching, but when's the last time the Army went as far as to put gusseted crotches in their BDUs?
Well, there's also another market for this technology that's bubbling up from the same folks who helped put more modern gear in the hands of specialized forces like SEALs, SF troops, Delta guys and Recon Marines -- among others. As the regular forces adopt shoulder pockets and chest rigs, for example, the spec ops community is pushing the envelope even further with new designs that will gradually trickle down to the regular Joes as the technology becomes more available.
One of the products I was introduced to at Blackhawk last week was their High Performance Fighting Uniform, or HPFU. They're pretty proud of this new product and it basically takes all the best whistles and bells, pockets and pouches, low-drag designs and modern materials available in the industry and packs them into a pretty innovative set of duds. Gusseted crotch, dual cargo pockets, articulated knees, a high-backed waist, padding pockets -- and that's just the pants. The HPFU also has a just-as-feature-packed jacket, and comes with a combat shirt that combines an FR-material in the chest and functional sleeves like the jacket. And there's even a nifty vest that can go over the combat shirt so it looks like you've got a full-on cammie jacket on when you go to the chow hall after a patrol -- it's Blackhawk's way of keeping gunny, first sergeant or master chief off your back.
But the high tech is more than skin deep.
Embedded within the uniform is Blackhawk's proprietary "Integrated Tourniquet System" -- a series of blood stanching bands that can lock off arterial bleeding in the arms, legs and ankles. It's a bit creepy, to be sure, but Blackhawk's clearly trying to put hardware into their software to save lives.
Company officials say the SEALs, with whom Blackhawk shares a close relationship, are wearing about 1,100 of the over $500 ensembles in combat right now. It's unclear what their feedback has been, but I'll throw in my $.02.
First, I pressed Blackhawk designers about the incorporation of fire resistant materials -- or lack thereof -- into the HPFU. Though their promotional materials state the uniform is made from "no-drip, no-melt" fibers --the arms and legs of the uniform are 70% cotton, 30% Nylon which they claim are woven in such a way as to make them flame resistant -- company officials were at pains to say whether their pricey HPFU was made with flame resistance in mind. Ironically, they touted the torso of the combat shirt's FR qualities, but that's going to be under body armor which incorporates its own flame and flash resistance.
Also, I can see that Blackhawk's heart is in the right place with the invention of its integrated tourniquet system and its incorporation into the HPFU, but my first impression with the thing is that it's not nearly as "Marine proof" as it needs to be. This is added weight and complication for a piece of kit that's supposed to be the epitome of simplicity.
Would I take the HPFU on my next embed? Maybe if I could be convinced of its FR qualities. It's a pretty sweet piece of gear and borrows heavily from the performance outdoor industry which is where I always felt the best gear is designed and made. We'll talk about their body armor systems in a later post, but if there's anything we can learn from the progression of that business segment of Blackhawk, it's pretty clear that when there are improvements to be made on a piece of gear, they don't hesitate to make them. So we'll see how the HPFU evolves. So far it's a pretty good start.
-- Christian
The Beam of Life
Until recently, I never really thought that much about flashlights. I use 'em for hunting, rooting around for lost socks and trying to see if my steak is rare or medium rare on those post daily savings winter grill nights.
In 2005 I got my hands on a Surefire tactical flashlight and was impressed with its beam strength and durability. I used it on night raids in Iraq as my as my first line of defense against an AK-47-toting bad guy waiting for me in a darkened room.
It wasn't until this past week at the Blackhawk media seminar that I learned how a properly employed beam can really be a big benefit in a low light gunfight.
Vaughn Baker, Blackhawk's flashlight guru, explained some of the technology that goes into making a tactical flashlight. There's a difference in performance with the lower priced models since they use Xenon bulbs, which throw less bright light a shorter distance. They work well, but when you step up to the LED bulbed models, that's where the beam is so bright it'll almost strip paint.
As Baker puts it "you can pole vault with that kind of flashlight."
I had no idea that the LED lights are programmable -- they have an electronic chip that regulates the amount of power transmitted from the battery to the bulb. The topest-end lights have several settings, one that shoots a hard bright, constant beam, a flick of the finger delivers a duller beam so you won't flash out your eyes if you need to look at a map or write some notes and another flip delivers a strobing beam on the highest power. Blackhawk's Gladius light can be customized by the user to deliver the desired brightness on each of the settings.
But its when Baker took us to the blackened shoot house that I really saw how flashlights -- when employed with newly developed tactics -- really help.
[Please excuse the darkened videos...there's not a ton to see, but you can hear Baker give a short lesson on how to -- and not to -- use your light]
Baker runs another company called Strategos International which has a two-day low-light training course designed to teach operators how to make the most of their tactical light.
According to Baker, 80 percent of police shooting fatalities happen in low light conditions and the vast majority of those happen within 10 to 20 feet. And oh by the way, on average the engagement lasts 2.5 seconds.
That's why to Baker it's critically important to learn how to leverage that flashlight to your maximum advantage in confrontations at night, or in darkened rooms. My experience with US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrated to me that while the troops had the flashlights on the end of their rifles, they weren't using them in any sort of "tactical" manner...in other words, they used them to light things but didn't use them in ways that would confuse their targets or mask their own movement.
The long and the short of it is, Baker says, hold the light away from your body with your off hand and flick it on and off in different places so an adversary can't get a fix on where it's coming from. Make sure to aim the light at the opponent's eyes when you do beam in on him and Baker's secret weapon is the strobe function. As he demonstrated on us, peripheral vision and balance are dramatically reduced when a bright as hell strobe is popping you in the face.
It was a truly fascinating look at not only the technology that goes into these highly sophisticated lights, but also how new techniques on their use can really give you an edge when you find yourself at the pointy end of the spear.
-- Christian
Say Hello To SERPA
We spent quite a bit of time on the range here at Blackhawk and one of the things they've put a lot of R&D and manufacturing effort into is their SERPA holster system.
Ever since thigh rigs became the carrier of choice for deployed troops, the need for an easy to release yet secure holster increased. The old nylon piece of junk that used to hold your M9 wouldn't cut it anymore.
The SERPA takes a little getting used to, but at the end of the day, it's probably the most logical solution for the constantly evolving pistol tactics in the military. Thigh rigs have given way to chest setups and the SERPA mounts just as comfortably on the front of your body armor as it does on a thigh rig, belt holster or shoulder holster. They've even designed a quick release system that allows you to mount the basic holster on any different carrier -- switching back and forth at will.
As you can see from the videos, the SERPA is a pretty good piece of gear even though it took this tactically deficient reporter a bit of muscle memory repetition to get the release point memorized.
-- Christian
Making the Best of the M9
I received an e-mail last week from a young man who'd had some issues with his M9 over in the Big Sandbox. As a complaint, this isn't a terribly new or unusual one. I'm pretty sure that if you did a survey of every military related blog and all the various tactical- or military-type magazines out there, you'd find numerous mentions of M9 problems in the desert.
But it was particularly important to me to answer the young man's query, since just a couple weeks ago I was talking to Slim about some Cav scouts we'd trained with previously. They'd also mentioned their M9 problems, and were also pretty disgruntled that they weren't given more time on the range with it before deploying. One of said he'd only fired it a couple times for qualification, never for proficiency or on a combat course. With the subject coming up twice in a month, once from the Marines and once from the Army, it seemed time to see what we could do to help.
So. The M9, 9mm Beretta. Civilian-wise we call it the 92F or 92FS, et al. Some guys love it, some hate it. There are civilian cops that swear by it, which baffles me personally, but guns are like boots and beer. Everyone has a favorite, usually held with a devoted certainty that says anyone that prefers a different model is a dumbass. you know what I'm talking about. 1911 guys (of any breed) make fun of Glock guys, who shake their heads at Sig guys, who just can't understand the S&W guys.
For myself, I prefer the M9 as a boat anchor if a Ruger isn't available but that's just me.
Anyway your opinion doesn't really matter in the military, as you're not given a choice. TO make matters worse, most of the guys that carry one aren't all that well trained with it. Trained, I said, not familiarized. I've been fortunate enough to spend a lot of time on the range with a lot of different folks, and with some exceptions it's been pretty clear that most military trigger-pullers are competent at best with the handgun. I don't equate competent with true proficiency. Keep in mind I'm not passing judgment. It's not the troops' fault. There's only so much training time and so many training rounds, but that doesn't excuse training NCOs and rangemasters from putting their people through some good drills to really promote mastery of the weapon.
Anyway, this isn't about training or courses of fire. This will be just a few quick hints we've found to be helpful when you have to carry one. So, Jeremy, here you go.
First off know how to do your own inspection for BMCLS (Broken, Missing, Worn, Clean, Lubed, Serviceable) as best as you can. Spend any extra time you can on the range and pay attention to guys that know more than you do. You never know when you might pick something up.
The firstest, mostest importanest thing after keeping it cleaned and lubed (which should be obvious unless you're one of my handlers, who cleans his guns once a year religiously on his birthday whether they need it or not) is your magazines. By far the most common feed failures experienced (that I'm aware of anyway) with the M9 pistol has been due to magazines. Check yours and make sure they're good to go. Oh, and you know how there are black ones and gray ones issued out? They gray ones are after-market, and usually they suck. The springs aren't as good and they're nowhere near as durable. If you've ever dropped one of the after-market gray ones on a hard surface you've probably watched it explode into its component pieces or have at least seen the rounds drop back until their noses are all pointed straight up.
Check the grips, especially if your magazine isn't wanting to seat. If it's an older M9, the grips were attached to the weapon with screws. There are/were washers inside the grips that spaced it properly so the screws held the grips on without intruding into the magazine wells. Depending upon who cleaned it last, or just got bored and took it apart, there's a good chance those washers are gone. With the washers gone the screws can sometimes protrude and get in the way of the magazine when you go to seat it.
The newer M9s (I think it's the M9A1, but I could be behind the curve here) uses allen wrenches to hold the grips on, so you don't have to worry about that. They're the ones with different rear sights and the half moon hammer pin showing, and depending upon attrition and replacement their recoil spring guide will be polymer instead of metal.
Oh, also, even if you don't have time to clean it or brush it out, always check the feed ramp for debris. If anything builds up there, even just a little bit, the front of the projectile can catch on it and prevent a good chambering of the round.
That's pretty much all I've got. Perhaps some of our readers can help out as well, or correct me if I gorked something up here. Remember, FATS or CATS or whatever is good, real range time is better, and it never hurts to dry fire. You can improve your skills just by drawing, presenting, aiming and pulling the trigger of an unloaded weapon. I've never heard of a police course or academy that didn't hound is students mercilessly to dryfire.
Now, remember: PRACTICE doesn't make perfect. Practice just makes you rehearsed. PERFECT practice makes perfect. Make sure you've got a good grip and you're doing it right every time you train. One last thing you might consider - if a shooter is going to have trouble with the M9's trigger pull, it will usually be the first one (double-action). This is natural, a double action shot trigger pull is typically going to be less accurate than a single action trigger pull (for most people). If you have the money and the inclination (and you don't live in the People's Republic of California) you might think about going and buying one of the civilian model 92s with the bobbed hammer. It's a pain in the ass, but all you can shoot with it is double action. Spend some time on the range with that in order to get used to that first trigger squeeze after you drag iron.
Calling the Army's new "universal" digital camouflage scheme for its field uniforms controversial is an understatement. People tend to fall into two camps: some grudgingly tolerate it, particularly in an urban, desert or urban/desert environment and others (most) just flat out hate it and can't understand why the Army went the way of loden greens and grays.
Why not Multi-cam (which almost everyone likes)? That's a whole 'nother subject...
No matter how you feel about it, sure seems like Joes are going to be stuck with the new pattern for a while since the Army spent gobs of money replacing its classic woodland scheme only within the last few years. But it turns out not everybody in the Army has to stick with the unpopular mandate.
According to the "Soldier Systems" blog, the Army G1 recently sent out guidance that allows special operations troops the option of wearing the old-school woodland cammies in jungle environments. The message states that USASOC troops can wear the old BDUs in the Pacific theater, Southern command area and Africa Command while "conducting operational training and contingency missions" there.
The order calls for logistics to keep the woodland items in the supply system for the snake eaters until otherwise notified.
Here's the message Soldier Systems pasted on its site:
SUBJECT: EXCEPTION TO POLICY FOR WEAR OF THE ENHANCED HOT WEATHER BATTLE DRESS UNIFORM (EHWBDU), AVIATION BATTLE DRESS UNIFORM (ABDU), AVIATION FLIGHT SUIT, AND ACCESSORY ITEMS
1. THIS MESSAGE SERVES AS AUTHORIZATION FOR WEAR OF THE EHWBDU, ABDU, AND ACCESSORY ITEMS AFTER THE MANDATORY WEAR OUT DATES FOR SOLDIERS ASSIGNED TO UNITED STATES ARMY SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND (USASOC) CONDUCTING OPERATIONAL TRAINING AND CONTINGECY MISSIONS IN THE FOLLOWING OCONUS THEATERS:
A. PACIFIC COMMAND
B. SOUTH COMMAND
C. AFRICA COMMAND
2. THE FOLLOWING WOODLAND ORGANIZATIONAL CLOTHING AND INDIVIDUAL EQUIPMENT (OCIE) ITEMS WILL BE MAINTAINED AS ISSUE IN THE ARMY SUPPLY SYSTEM:
UNIFORM ITEMS
BOI
A. EHWBDUs (COAT AND TROUSERS) 4
B. ABDUs (COAT AND TROUSERS) 4
C. GEN I GORTEX (COAT AND TROUSERS) 1
D. BDU, SUN HAT 1
E. BROWN T-SHIRTS 4
F. PATROL CAP 1
G. AVIATION FLIGHT SUIT 2
H. ARMY COMBAT HELMET COVER 1
I. BLACK BOOTS (HOT WEATHER, SPEED LACE) 2
3. POC FOR UNIFORM POLICY IS XXX.
4. THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE DCS, G-1.
5. EXPIRATION DATE CANNOT BE DETERMINED.
Isn't that just like the Army? Can't have the HK416 or the SCAR...nope, you gotta stick to your M4. And now, you're being forced to stick out like a sore thumb in the jungle, but the commandos can stay nice and concealed. Thanks...
-- Christian
War Spurs Change in Sniper Gear, Tactics
From the headlines at Military.com...
The conflicts stemming from the attacks on 9/11 showed America's military snipers were badly in need of modernization. Their gear, operational doctrine and training needed an update -- and fast. As the war evolved, units with combat experience shared lessons learned, identifying new requirements for a unique conflict. Fortunately the services took notice and began to revamp the sniper community in numerous ways.
Problem: Inadequate/outdated doctrine.
Solution: Small-unit leaders began to develop employment strategies that earlier training never covered, based on the current situation and environment. This, coupled with after-action reports, lessons learned and the general sharing of information, led to comprehensive sniper planning, support and employment-things like providing security for the sniper team during movement and relying on the sniper to provide the real-time intelligence for on-the-spot combat decisions.
Probably the biggest change was when-and-how to bring the snipers to bear for the desired result. Unit leaders learned that snipers could control large areas, create enemy reluctance and force enemy movement in a desired direction. There was a gradual recognition of how valuable assets like snipers and designated marksmen could be when properly utilized.
Problem: Inadequate equipment.
Solution: A number of commercially procured items became popular, including the Eberlestock pack, which allows the sniper to carry his rifle on his back protected and concealed while he carries a battle rifle for his own protection during movement. Other items such as rests, tripods and various bipods were procured to meet the varied terrain and conditions.
The issued spotting scope and tripod did not perform as needed in environments where ranges were either very long or very short, and precise optical definition was an absolute requirement for friend-or-foe identification. High-end spotting scopes such as the Leupold 12-40x60mm Mark 4, Zeiss 85mm, and Swarovski ATS 80's were quickly procured along with better quality tripods/mounts. Hydration systems, too, became a crucial ingredient in the sniper's pack.
The sniper of today is vastly better outfitted than he was six years ago. Individual and organizational efforts outside of official channels to provide free equipment/gear to snipers played a huge role in sniper evolution as well. Groups such as "Adopt a Sniper" (www.AmericanSnipers.org) collected and pushed large quantities of equipment to operators in the war zone and provided a conduit for specific requests from the field. In most cases the equipment was donated by industry or provided at a huge discount.
Problem: Inadequate optical sights.
Solution: Early on the word went out to procure optics for a variety of uses from crew-served weapons to M4 carbines. Many snipers purchased or procured variable-power optics for use on their sniper systems to allow them to open up their field of view while retaining the zoom capabilities.
In other cases higher-power optics were procured to allow the snipers to engage at extended ranges. The Marine Corps was in the process of selecting the Schmidt & Bender PMII (a.k.a. M8541), which has proved to be an outstanding product. Many Army units procured the Leupold Mark 4 M3 LR/T 3.5-10X as a replacement for the fixed 10X Leupold M3 "Ultra." Many other optics companies such as U.S. Optics and Nightforce saw increased sales of their products in an effort by the military to meet field requirements.
The acquisition of new optics also opened up the need or desire for mission-enhancing accessories. Devices such as the "angle cosine indicator" from Sniper Tools and a variety of mounting solutions like the Modular Accessory Rail System from Remington became popular and are now in widespread use.
In addition to the new optics, mounts and accessories, this new war brought interest in new reticule systems such as those offered by Horus Vision, Leupold, Nightforce and U.S. Optics, which provide different or enhanced approaches to range estimation, hold offs, elevation/windage changes and firing solutions.
Problem: A shortage of snipers and precision weapons.
Solution: Simple things such as adding an optic to an M4/M16, which previously had been considered "Hollywood," became the norm with the widespread purchase of the Trjicon ACOG. While not by itself a "sniper" system, units quickly discovered that troops with above-average shooting ability and snipers could extract a heavy toll on the enemy with such a system. It was this revelation that helped define the concept of the designated marksman - basically a soldier with slightly more training than the average grunt, equipped with an optically sighted rifle to engage targets at ranges the "typical" shooter could not.
Problem: Modernization of existing SWS (Sniper Weapons Systems.)
Solution: Around 2004, Remington introduced its M24A2 as an upgrade to the M24. This included a new stock, variable power optics, an optics rail that allows the use of in-line night vision IR lasers and a sound suppressor. While being very popular with the snipers, funding and authorization have never materialized. The U.S. Navy worked with Sage International to procure the Enhanced Battle Rifle, which is a modified M14 placed in an aluminum chassis that features multiple rails and a collapsible stock. They found this combination, although somewhat heavy, to be very effective. The Corps has conducted a variety of experiments with adding suppressors to their M40A3's but to date these suppressors are not in widespread use.
Problem: Rate of fire.
Solution: This problem gave rise to the development by the Army of the Semi-Automatic Sniper System solicitation. This effort was intended to procure a 7.62 semi-auto system that provided the accuracy of a bolt system in addition to the rapid firing capability of a semi. The Army eventually selected a system which they are now beginning to field in small quantities. The original concept was to replace all of the bolt-action systems with the new autoloading system. But it now appears that snipers need both capabilities. The USMC and USAF are currently reviewing the concept to determine which direction they will go.
Problem: Weight and the inability to engage targets at ranges beyond 1,000 meters.
Solution: Early solutions included the application of the .300 WinMag, but the availability of ammo was an issue. Many U.S. allies fielded systems chambered in .338 Lapua Magnum, which has gained considerable popularity among U.S. snipers. It remains unclear as to what direction this will take, as both industry and the services themselves are exploring alternatives.
The benefit of the current conflict in terms of equipment and technology development has been vast and modernization efforts in this area will likely continue. As in any war, necessity has been the mother of invention and snipers have never been as educated and well equipped as they are today.
I've been working on this for a few weeks and haven't been able to eke out enough gouge from the other participants for a fuller story, but I figured I'd share with you what I know before it dies on the vine.
An industry source told me that the Marine Corps is close to deciding who will replace its M249 Squad Automatic Weapon with a new gun so-far called the "Infantry Automatic Rifle." Basically, the Corps wants something that looks more like a standard assault rifle, fires from an open breech (and closed breech) in both full and semi-auto modes and "shall demonstrate improved portability, reliability, and maneuverability through constricted terrain and conditions over the current M249 SAW," SysCom told me.
The Corps plans to purchase 4,476 IARs and I'm told the decision on who wins the competition will be coming very soon. The industry source told me that about six companies entered the competition, including Land Warfare Resources Corp., Colt, H&K, FN-USA and a team of General Dynamics and the Singapore company called Ultimax.
Future Weapons has a good video on the LWRC version of the IAR and I'm told the FN-USA version is a play on the SCAR that fires in both open and closed bolt configuration.
The one thing I'm a bit concerned about is the amount of rounds in the mag -- 30 rounds is going to go awfully quick in a suppression or cover fire situation. I'm sure there's a drum being developed for each, but then it's going to be obvious who the automatic rifleman is.
But as long as it's lighter and more portable than the SAW, I guess I can see why they want to make the switch. If anyone has any insight on this competition, please chime in.
-- Christian
Kill Bin Laden: UPDATE II
[EDITOR: Updated Nov. 7, 2008 -- After some correspondence with the author I have decided to redact his real name, though it had been revealed by another forum quite a while ago. Fury made a compelling case that he was worried about putting his family's live in danger, and as someone with a young daughter of my own, compassion outweighed journalistic ethics. I am sincerely sorry for any problems this may have caused and I wish Fury the best of luck in his endeavors...Please read the upcoming review of "Kill bin Laden" on Military.com.]
So, after I posted the last thread, I went over to a forum that's populated with no-joke special operations forces troops and looked at the discussion on the KBL/ Dalton Fury imbroglio. Man is it hot in there.
Apparently, Dalton Fury's real name is [DELETED BY EDITOR]. I was wrong in thinking he was Pete Blaber, though it does turn out from the discussion that Blaber has a book of his own coming out called "The Mission, The Men, and Me: Lessons from a Former Delta Force Commander" that's supposed to be available in December.
These operators at the forum are none too kind to a guy who's attempting to "profit" from revealing covert operations covered under top secret non disclosure agreements. They skewer him and smoke his body over a pit of coals. But none of them disputes who he is, what he's done or how the mission went down. There's little comment about the actual 60 Minutes broadcast, though it would have been helpful if the reporters had mentioned the controversy Fury has caused and held fast on calling him by his real name [DELETED BY EDITOR]. Once it's out in the open, it looks a little ridiculous for a reputable news organization to stick to a pseudonym.
As a reporter who's covered the military for a decade, I get a little annoyed at the knuckle-dragger attitude that someone who says anything about their covert activity should be banished. Give me a break. That attitude perpetuates an elitist, Samurai mentality that says "you don't need to know. Just trust us, we know what we're doing..."
Sorry, but I -- and millions of other Americans -- pay your salary and we damned right want to know what you're doing. You work for us. So I'm glad, as long as it doesn't deliberately put lives in danger of death (like the politically-motivated CIA tell-alls did back in the '70s), that these stories come out. There's been seven years between then and now, surely Delta and CIA have new ways of doing things that aren't compromised by this book.
I will say that I think Eric Haney's book went over the line -- in terms of TTPs and training. Ouch...And the guys over at the operator board skewered him for that as well. But that's a case where the quilty pleasure of the inside gouge outweighed my scruples a bit...Inside Delta Force was SUCH a good read.
-- Christian
Plan to Kill bin Laden Rejected
I saw this program last night on 60 Minutes and I thought I'd explore it with you all.
It's a segment on a former Delta officer who lead a team tasked with killing or capturing bin Laden in Afghanistan. Calling himself Dalton Fury, the former officer (a major at the time) has written a book on his experiences artfully titled "Kill bin Laden: A Delta Force Commander's Account of the Hunt for the World's Most Wanted Man" (in case we couldn't understand the title itself)...
I know nothing about the book, though I have requested a review copy from the publisher and I'll peel it open for you when I get it. But the premise of the report is that Fury was frustrated by higher headquarters' management of the hunt, denying his plan to A.) attack bin Laden in Tora Bora from the rear -- aka from Pakistan...and B.) lay landmines in the approaches to bin Laden's Tora Bora lair so that one one went off, Delta could target the al Qaeda troops with Specters and Spookies.
After being denied on both, they decided on a frontal assault with Afghan allies of questionable loyalties and motivations, eventually allowing bin Laden to slip away -- though they did think they'd killed him in an air strike.
My thought is this: First of all, NO DUH they denied your plan to approach Tora Bora from Pakistan...the risks, both diplomatic and military were too much to contemplate. It's one thing to have planes flying out of remote bases; another to have an "invading" ground force try an Alpine assault from an area teeming with AQ and their sympathizers. Also...LAND MINES!? Come on, you HAD to have known that would never fly. As if Afghanistan doesn't have enough of them littering the landscape already. What are we, the Soviets? (their potential words, not mine)...
Also, in terms of who this guy is...I'm wondering if he's Pete Blaber, a star of Sean Naylor's "Not a Good Day to Die" on the fight for Takur Gar and Operation Anaconda.
Check this report out and throw your $.02 into the comments. To me this seems like a reasonably frustrated officer irked at reasonably legitimate restrictions on his operations. But I can't wait to read the book...
-- Christian
One Heck of a Sim
It was one of the more popular booths at the Modern Day Marine show this week.
A huge screen with little computerized Russians running around and a couple Marines plinking them off like a warm sunny day on the Fulda Gap. That's the Virtual Battlespace Trainer and it's about as close to real life as a video game can get.
Except it's much more than that. According to Dale Pruna, Range Systems Manager for Laser Shot, the simulator has a full ballistics calculation capability and can track and map where shooters shoot and how badly they miss. The scenarios are totally programmable, so if you have an HVT mission with specific intel on the house layout and where targets are, you can run through it with full diagnostics.
The system also has target shooting programs that work on marksmanship skills against running targets and there's a module for shoot-no-shoot scenarios using live video images rather than computerized footage.
Pruna also said the services are looking at the company's live fire version of the simulator which uses a reusable rubber screen that can absorb everything from 5.56 to 7.62 rounds.
I gave it a whirl and it was fun as heck. And darned realistic too. All I can tell you is I'm glad I'm a better shot than I am a pilot (on a simulator).
-- Christian
Robot Arms: Not Just for the Jedi Anymore
It's not a topic to be taken lightly, despite the flippant nature of my title. You have got to read this, though. We've seen a lot of critically wounded service personnel return to fight the enemies that made them amputees in the first place. Some of the stories are remarkable. Grunts that lose and arm, so they study math to go back into the artillery, snipers that lose one eye so they teach themselves to shoot from the other. It's humbling, though if I had my druthers such incredible achievements would never be necessary.
Now this guy has designed something that takes prosthetic replacement to a whole new level. It's cool as hell, gang, and you have to wonder if it's not the often-theorized bridge to what you might as well think an "augmented grunt". Call it the Steve Austin theory (the really cool action hero from when I was growing up, not the big sweaty dude that jumps around a wrestling ring with other big sweaty dudes). You know. We can rebuild him. Better. Stronger. Faster.
Just for the record, for those of you who don't remember the Cold War, astronaut Steve Austin was way more bad ass and far cooler than the Terminator, Jake 2.0 or any of the other modern versions. Nothing against 'em, I'm just saying.
Anyway, inventor Dean Kamen, the guy that named it after Luke Skywalker (instead of Lee Majors' character, unfortunately, but we'll let that slide) says that while fatalities are down on the battlefield (better armor, better CASEVAC procedures, faster movement to a higher level of care facility, etc.), a lot of our guys and gals are coming back from the AOR missing limbs. The number of amputees has gone down some as quality of armor on the vehicles we're using goes up, but the while there are fewer troops losing limbs, the proportion of double amputatees has gone way up (as the insurgents use more and more powerful devices like the EFP to compensate for the better armor. In 2006, 25% of all servicemen and -women that became amputees lost two or more limbs; double the rate of 2003. Amputees comprise approximately 2.2% of WIA personnel, but 5% of personnel who are unable to return to duty. These are grim statistic sindeed, maybe one that really doesn't make your yes and heart hurt until you see them recovering and getting on with their lives. I'm honestly not sure how the staff there can go in day after day and not spend their evenings weeping.
So Dean Kamen set out to out to develop a prosthetic arm that would be sensitive enough to pick up a grape and allow a resident of Walter Reed's Ward 57 to pick up a razor, but be "self-contained" in terms of power. The original goal for development was a two year deadline. Apparently about a year later they'd developed a 9lb motorized arm using titanium and custom built motors, an arm with 18 degrees of movement. Not as good as never losing your arm to a muj device in the first place, but better than having to wipe your ass with a hook the rest of your life.
According to Gizmodo, "... control techniques are revolutionary. He's playing a video of a guy who didn't have both his arms for 18 years, and learned how to use the arms effectively in less than two dozen hours of training. He's showing a video that shows a guy who knows how to punch, pass a Ping Pong ball to his friend and pour a drink for another man who is holding a cup with the same type of arm. Then the video shows Chuck, the man with no arms, for the first time in 13 years, feeding himself cereal..."
Here's the most amazing thing about it - they're developing it so the limb can be controlled by the amputee's mind. Perhaps more of a conscious thing that what you're used to, but think about the ramifications of that for a minute. It's like something from the sci-fi channel (think Eureka) being used right now to improve the remainder of the lives of young men and women that have scarcely begun their lives. We're talking at times about personnel who aren't yet old enough to walk in and buy themselves a beer, but they've given up limbs in the service of their country.
Gizmodo also says that, "Attaching the arm directly to nerves required a lot of surgery...but there are limited arm functions, even if it's very complicated. Learning how to control a back hoe, with four controls, takes years. And the arm has 18 degrees of freedom. But people don't learn how by using each degree. In fact, it's more efficient, Dean says. There are three degrees of freedom, so they did macros. With this, a man learned how to pick up bottles, nails and other items.
Attaching the arm was a challenge, day to day. Nine pounds on an arm is heavy over a few minutes, let alone a day. So they knew that no one would wear them because of that. So Dean designed air bladders that shift the weight on the body when passive (like fidgeting in a chair) and inflate to be hard when the servos in the arm detect a load..."
Research is continuing for the use of infrared light to read signals going through the skull as a possible control mechanism.
I think the thing that impresses me the most about this guy is his attitude. He says it the responsibility of intellectually gifted and or wealthy people to help make the world a better place. He obviously walks the damn walk.
If you can stand to read more without your heart breaking (and I'm being serious here, not a wise ass) you might check out Military inStep, http://www.amputee-coalition.org/military-instep/.
I like dogs. Always have. A house without a pet is not a home? Bullshit. A house without a dog is not a home. Now they're building dogs we'll eventually take into places like the Hindu Kush, possibly instead of a humvee, certainly in the place of a donkey, backbreaking ruck or indentured servant. It's wicked cool. Me and Slim have watched the video a dozen times since our buddy Mark the Ninja sent us an e-mail about it from the depths of his DC hidey-hole.
Honestly, this thing is more like a techie's metal donkey than a dog. Nobody north of Tijuana wants a donkey curled up in their bed or bringing them the paper though, which I'm confident is why they named it what they did.
Billed as "the most advanced quadruped robot on Earth" and funded by DARPA, Boston Dynamics' Big Dog is just one of several robots under development. It walks, runs, climbs rough terrain, carries more weight than an 0341 and won't piss on the floor. Cyberfido runs on a gasoline engine that "drives a hydraulic actuation system", which I'm guessing is a little more complicated than a self-propelled pull-start mower (at least a little bit). It walks a little bit like an Imperial ATAT and sounds like a pissed off remote control airplane, but the potential for this thing is awesome.
According to the Boston Dynamics website, "BigDog's legs are articulated like an animal’s, and have compliant elements that absorb shock and recycle energy from one step to the next. BigDog is the size of a large dog or small mule, measuring 1 meter long, 0.7 meters tall and 75 kg weight.
Here's a video:
BigDog has an on-board computer that controls locomotion, servos the legs and handles a wide variety of sensors. BigDog’s control system manages the dynamics of its behavior to keep it balanced, steer, navigate, and regulate energetics as conditions vary. Sensors for locomotion include joint position, joint force, ground contact, ground load, a laser gyroscope, and a stereo vision system. Other sensors focus on the internal state of BigDog, monitoring the hydraulic pressure, oil temperature, engine temperature, rpm, battery charge and others."
I don't know as of this writing whether BigDog is a two-stroke or four-stroke engine, whether it used dilithium crystals or how many gigs of memory it has. Presumably BigDog's processing suite is duotronic rather than positronic. Unconfirmed rumors allege that Boston Dynamics pulled all Windows Vista operating systems from the prototype BigDogs after they suffered repetitive epileptic fits during task performance reviews.
BigDog can carry about 20 pounds and reach speeds up to 4 mph (which is certainly fast enough to keep up with some poor bastard of an 11C trying to climb the Ghilzai plateau, and certainly faster than you can drive through traffic in Tikrit), climbs slopes up to 35 degrees, walks across rubble, and carries a 340 lb load. BigDog is part of a program intended to create robots with "rough terrain mobility that can take them anywhere on Earth that people can go." Marc Raibert, the founder of Boston Dynamics, says of BigDog's locomotion, "Legs can go places that wheels and tracks can't go, and there are lots of those places on Earth."
From what's been accomplished so far, it seems like they're well on their way to reaching this goal. I'm sure further testing remains. Certainly I'd have questions for such a machine once it went operational. How would it do in the heat and grit of the Dasht-e Kavir? Could it ford the Khash-rud River with the grunts if they had to wade across? Could a version be built to withstand small arms fire as it humped a load of AT-4s across the street to resupply the grunts clearing houses?
The possible uses for such a machine are by no means bound by military application, of course. Think of them working with the Forestry Service fighting wildfires, or carrying life saving equipment for search and rescue teams.
I think it would be funny to have BigDog walk the dog so I don't have to, but then again I'm pretty lazy. I back my damn car down the driveway to check the mail and I never run unless someone is chasing me.
There's a lot more about BigDog and his cousins on the web, if you're interested. BigDog Beta even has a MySpace page. The official Boston Dynamics website is right here.
WARNING: Do not go to RedTube and type in BigDog, you'll be grossed out.
That's it for now. Thanks again to Mark the Ninja.
MOYOCK, N.C. -- It's a name that's become synonymous with the murky world of counterinsurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan - where the subtle tones of the enemy's colors blend in with innocents.
In a war like this, no one is secure and the military has its hands full, so the American government has turned increasingly to civilian contractors who pick up the slack where military and federal security personnel left off.
One of the most recognizable players in the private security industry is Blackwater Worldwide, the company founded by former SEAL Erik Prince in the mid-1990s. Though the company is best known for its burley, highly-trained security guards who are often pictured flanking State Department officials and ambassadors in Iraq or Afghanistan, there's more to this sprawling, 7,000 acre compound here in the swampy coastal plains of North Carolina's northeast than meets the eye.
"It's a Disneyland for operators," said Blackwater founding member and current president Gary Jackson during an August 22 tour of the company's grounds. "They come here and they just can't believe it."
With an array of firing ranges, shoot houses, an aviation support fleet and a roster of trainers capable of delivering instruction on any kind of martial skill known to man, Blackwater has become a juggernaut in the world of private military companies.
Originally founded as a training and target manufacturing company, Blackwater has launched a media offensive to shake off its reputation among critics as a "shoot-first-ask-questions-later" band of bearded mercenaries. Two high-profile incidents in Iraq propelled the normally secretive company onto America's front pages, and the news wasn't good.
In March 2004, four Blackwater contractors were ambushed and mutilated in Fallujah, Iraq, sparking a brutal invasion of the city that was soon halted after the fragile Baghdad government balked at the public outcry. The incident sparked a furious debate over how prepared security contractors were to deal with the insurgency and added fuel to simmering resentment from traditional military forces angry that they had to come to Blackwater's rescue only to be pulled back before the job was done.
Then in September of last year, Blackwater guards securing a State Department motorcade were accused of killing as many as 20 Iraqis when they claimed their convoy came under fire in Nisoor Square in busy downtown Baghdad.
Though Blackwater claims a perfect record in securing its clients, some say it comes at the cost of highly aggressive tactics and civilian bullying.
In the wake of those scandals and the nagging pursuit of anti-Blackwater lawmakers, the company is working to burnish its image by going back to its roots: training and logistics services -- call it "Blackwater 2.0."
"Our biggest growth units are international training and aviation," Jackson said, explaining that his company now has only two personal security detail contracts. "I literally can't put enough airplanes out there."
With dozens of ranges that cater to everything from long distance shooters, to demolitions technicians to super-secret "tier one" special operations forces, Blackwater is hard to beat when it comes to the sheer breadth of military tactics training a force could do here - particularly at a time when communities increasingly shun the environmental impact of military operations in their backyards.
In fact, the Virginian Beach police department has a 40 year lease with Blackwater -- 30 miles from the coastal city -- to train its officers, since range space is so limited where they work, Jackson said.
And the company's entrepreneurialism doesn't stop there. In a corrugated steel airplane hanger, a row of three Blackwater-designed mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles sit in various stages of assembly. The company missed the initial order for standard MRAPs after the services reduced their buy, but the company's new MRAP II -- dubbed the "Grizzly" -- boasts greater protection against armor-penetrating explosively formed penetrator bombs and could be a player for future orders that meet that growing threat, Blackwater officials say.
They're even working on cooking-grease-fueled vehicles, power-generating windmills and airship surveillance drones.
But, ironically, it's Blackwater's re-emphasis on training that's caught the ire of lawmakers in Washington who question why the Pentagon hires out instruction critics say should be taught in the services' own school houses.
Blackwater got its first contract from the Navy after the bombing of the Cole exposed a shortfall in tactical training capacity for its sailors. After 9/11, that need increased as Sailors were called upon to board suspicious ships, defend their fleet from attackers and man defensive positions in the Persian Gulf and elsewhere.
Today, Blackwater continues that training at its facility here, bussing in Sailors from Norfolk every day to practice takedowns on the company's "ship in a box" -- stacked, floating containers assembled to mimic a ship's bridge. So far the company has trained about 130,000 sailors and says that in any one day over 5,000 students could be firing, jumping, fighting and blowing things up on a Blackwater range.
Virginia Democratic Senator James Webb, a vocal critic of Blackwater and other private military companies, has asked Pentagon chief Robert Gates to study how much training civilian companies provide the DoD and to analyze whether it would be more efficient for the services to do it on their own. Gates passed the question on to Joint Chiefs chairman Adm. Mike Mullen, who's looking into the matter.
To Jackson, all this talk gets his blood boiling. In his view, Blackwater responds to the needs of its customers when all else has failed, and he sees no problem with filling in on training that the services can't do themselves without significant investment.
"The Navy can't build that [training] infrastructure in 20 years. The only way they're ever going to get there is to start the draft," an exasperated Jackson said. "The thing that really upsets me the most is that [training] is run by contractors."
"No matter who wins the election, it doesn't matter. It's not going to stop."
-- Christian
Coast Guard Joins the SEALs
The Coast Guard wants to get a bit more "hooyah" by jumping on the special operations forces bandwagon with a new program that could put as many as 28 of its personnel into elite Navy SEAL teams by 2016.
Coast Guard officials say this limited number of Coasties-turned-SEALs re-entering their ranks after a tour in the special warfare community -- which could last as many as seven years -- will be a boon for morale, training and job skills in a service that bridges the worlds of counter-terrorism operations and law enforcement.
"What this does is it provides us better capability, increased competencies, more experience and greater knowledge to do the things that we are already doing today," said Rear Adm. Thomas Atkin, commander of the Coast Guard's Deployable Operations Group which deals with specialized counter-terrorism and military missions.
"They're going to be able to bring back an esprit de corps that you learn within the SEAL community. We don't always have that," Atkin added during an Aug. 15 interview with military bloggers. "We have a great service, I'm very proud to wear the blue, but the esprit de corps that comes out of the folks that go to BUDS [and] members of SEAL teams ... those experiences, that knowledge, that mindset are all things that are going to benefit the Coast Guard in the long term."
Though Atkin said "anecdotally" there's a lot of enthusiasm for the program, so far no Coastguardsmen have applied in the two weeks since it was announced. The deadline for applications is in mid-September.
The SEALs, along with other special operations forces in the Army, Air Force and Marine Corps, have been adding to their ranks since the Sept. 11 attacks and the injection of even a few more personnel from the Coast Guard is a welcome addition, a Navy Special Warfare officer said.
"What that means to us is approximately two SEAL platoons," said Lt. Cmdr. Christian Dunbar, director of training at the Navy Special Warfare Center in Coronado, Calif. "This just adds a greater base of qualified candidates that don't come from recruits in the Navy or from the fleet. ... It's a win-win for everyone."
The new relationship between the SEALs and Coast Guard was forged in an Aug. 1 memorandum of understanding signed by Commandant Thad Allen and representatives of the Navy and Special Operations Command after nearly a year of negotiations among the services. Allen wrote in an "Alcoast" message announcing the plan that Coastguardsmen will gain "valuable skills and knowledge to support [the] DoD and increase the Coast Guard's capabilities in our ports, waterways and coastal security mission, specifically counter-terrorism and anti-terrorism operations."
But the new program is not without its critics, particularly within the highest ranks of the Coast Guard community, sources say. The culture of the more than two century-old service bridges both civilian and military operations with a traditional emphasis in rescue, maritime safety and law enforcement.
Since the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security and the Coast Guard's new counter-terrorism role, that culture and operational mentality has changed, experienced Coast Guard sources say. That's made the shift toward a more SEAL-like ethos -- particularly in the newly established Deployable Operations Group, where the SEAL vets will return for duty after their team tour -- more acceptable to old-school Coastguardsmen.
"I think it's going to be very compatible," said Coast Guard Master Chief Petty Officer Darrick DeWitt, the DOG's senior enlisted advisor. "When you look at the way the Coast Guard's evolving ... bringing in that type of mentality and culture and understanding of the operations is going to be great for our organization."
Officials with the DOG will handle the initial SEAL applicants, putting them through a set of physical tests to demonstrate whether they have what it takes to be a commando -- a process Dunbar said would "set them up for success." Those who make it through will enter pre-BUDS training in December, and the first group will join a BUDS class in February 2009.
So far the plan is to have two officers and two enlisted personnel assigned to the SEALs each year, but Atkin said he's not going to stick to that formula if the qualifications don't match.
To Atkin, a former SEAL steeped in both the traditions of special warfare and law enforcement would be a key addition to his command -- and one long in coming.
"This is historic, it's different, but I think it's very consistent with the long partnership we've had with the United States Navy stretching all the way back to our birth 218 years ago," Atkin said.
-- Christian
The Mag Mag
In the "gadgets and gizmos" category today, I ran across this interesting item as I was perusing the sight from our friends at BreachBangClear.
Think of it as a magazine for M-16 mags.
The STRAC Technologies FAST (Fast And Smooth Transition) system is a hardened pouch designed to hold three spring-loaded rifle magazines that feed out as the operator reloads his carbine. The folks over at MilSpecMonkey did an intensive review of the product, the full version of which you can read HERE.
But, while it seems like an interesting idea, I agree with the folks at MilSpecMonkey that there are limited applications of the product. I can see uses for it in law enforcement, where tactical teams really don't have a need for any more than 100 rounds for a particular situation. And I can see where vehicle operators might like it for its more flush-to-the-body configuration.
From MilSpecMonkey:
As with most things, the FAST System has pluses and minuses. The good part is that the system functions totally as advertised. You can become a consistent reloading super star in about 20 minutes of practice and only get better from there. One of the first downsides however is the bulk. The space required by FAST is the equivalent of over 6 30 round magazines, but it only holds 3 magazines. Also some may feel the required grips for mag extraction are awkward. Personally after using it I feel the grip is "good enough". On this particular prototype, I wish the body was connected to the carrier in a more solid fashion. The only thing holding it in there is a piece of velcro on the back of the body and friction inside the carrier. With the dust cover down I can wiggle the body out of the carrier with one hand while still on my body. It doesn't feel outright unsafe, but could be better. That said, it should be noted this preview is of a prototype and the final version will solve this issue with webbing loop slots to lash the body down to one's vest. This is to get the extraction area closer to the body, but would secure the system further as well. Unfortunately the simple design only allows standard NATO magazines to be used in the FAST system. Magazines with any additional height such as PMAGs, Lancer, and HK mags will not fit. Although I wish they could fit, as a designer I can see where the system would become overly complicated if altered to do so. As the final con, the FAST System could easily be called expensive, but that is usually the price of cutting edge technology.
Here's a pretty good video of the FAST system in action at the range:
And another one with some SWAT bubbas giving their impressions of the system:
-- Christian
So you Wanna be Batman, Huh?
There are a lot of difficult training courses out there in the military. There's Ranger School and jump school, SERE, HALO, dive school, the "Green Footprint" I-school, Scout-Sniper School.
Most famously of course are things like the SF Q-Course and BUDS. Anyone that watches TV or goes to the movies can seemingly discuss their relative difficulty and merits (it's hard to read sarcasm, but try).
Slightly less well known over here on this side of the pond is the Brecon Beacons part of SAS Selection, Canada's SOBQ, the Golani Training School and the BBE's "Black Tulip" shindig. All of these pale in comparison to one unnamed training cycle of such incredible difficulty it's only been successfully completed one time. That's right. It's the training regimen known colloquially as "Becoming Batman."
Interested? Well, Scientific American interviewed the author recently, asking such questions as How many of us do you think could become a Batman?
The response: "If you found the percentage of billionaires and multiply that by the percentage of people who become Olympic decathletes, you could probably get a close estimate. The really important thing is just how much a human being really can do. There's such a huge range of performance and ability you can tap into..."
Battling bad guys. High-tech hideouts. The gratitude of the masses. Who at some point in their life hasn't dreamed of being a superhero?
Impossible, right? Or is it?
Possessing no supernatural powers, Batman is the most realistic of all the superheroes. His feats are achieved through rigorous training and mental discipline, and with the aid of fantastic gadgets. Drawing on his training as a neuroscientist, kinesiologist, and martial artist, E. Paul Zehr explores the question: could a mortal ever become Batman?
Zehr discusses the physical and skill training necessary to maintain bad-guy-fighting readiness while relating the science underlying this process -- from strength conditioning to the cognitive changes a person would endure in undertaking such a regimen. In probing what a real-life Batman could achieve, Zehr considers the level of punishment a consummately fit and trained person could handle, how hard and fast such a person could punch and kick and the number of adversaries that individual could dispatch, what it would be like to fight while wearing a batsuit, and the amount of food one would have to consume each day to maintain vigilance as Gotham City's guardian.
A fun foray of escapism grounded in sound science, Becoming Batman provides the background for attaining the realizable—though extreme—level of human performance that would allow you to be a superhero.
[Editor's Note: Welcome to our new contributors "Slim" and "Swingin' Richard" from the BreachBangClear blog. They'll give us the inside scoop on what operators like (and dislike) in terms of weapons, gear, training and tactics, so stay tuned for more.]
