"Pentagon Priorities" Topic

Call me old school … but IMO they should ask Infantry, Tank, etc. Plt Ldrs & Co. Cdrs what they need. That should be the priorities.

With all the threats to the USA, NATO, Westerners, etc. e.g. Xi, Putin, Iran, islamic jihadis/terrorists, open Southern border, etc., etc. One would think those may be high on the list of the Pentagon's priorities …

From Military.com :

link

IMO, lowering energy costs is OK. They are requesting $2.25 USDB for energy for "climate resilience" out of a total request for $813 USDB. So, if my math is correct, that's about 3%?

Seems reasonable. I have read many accounts of troops complaining about batteries dying, having to carry a lot of weight in batteries for various equipment, etc. If some research can cut that down, seems OK. OTOH, only $.25 USDB is going for that.

I have read many accounts of troops complaining about batteries dying, having to carry a lot of weight in batteries for various equipment, etc. If some research can cut that down, seems OK.

That was the same when I was a Plt Ldr & Co Cdr on Active Duty :'79-'90 Along with equipment shortages. If the $ goes to making the Grunt's life easier – fine. I too am all for it.

But IMO war fighter skills, training, etc. should be the #1 priority. Not basing many things on a Green agenda. If they can do both that is ok … but based on many things I see. I don't know if military readiness is really part of their priority ?

We'll have to see … I am not confident …

"Climate resilience" is more than just saving energy. Look at the destruction caused at Tyndal and Offutt.

Are you referring to hurricane and tornado damages?

If you are referring to 2018 Hurrican Michael at Tyndal, not sure what climate resilience measures would help? Hurricane Michael was the strongest to hit in 25 years, but on the whole, the jury is still out on whether hurricane activity has been increasing or decreasing or is just in its normal cyclic variation.

I know some people think battery operated AFV's is a joke, but the first country that develops a functionally useful system is going to enjoy fairly good strategic advantages – at least for awhile. Ukraine are claiming 87 destroyed tankers and plenty of anecdotal reports of abandoned vehicles with empty fuel tanks. Plus a couple of Russian fuel depots seem to have 'accidentally' caught fire.

The climate is changing and some areas are heating up significantly. Sophisticated electronics really don't like that and nor particularly do humans beyond a certain point. Arctic bases on perma-frost may well be a particular and expensive problem since they were probably built on the basis of permafrost being, well, permanent and may need reconstructing with more traditional foundations. TBH a lot climate resilience is mainly about ensuring your infrastructure is fit for purpose and can take a hit. Probably stuff people should already be doing, but if I had a pound for every-time my employer got into trouble because a backup power supply didn't kick in when tested – I'd still not be able to retire.

Yeah, but what charges the batteries in the AFV? Armies will have to have infrastructure to do that instead of fuel tankers think large battery trucks. IMO, trading tanks with empty fuel tanks for tanks with dead batteries.

Yeah, but wouldn't need 'special' battery trucks or indeed a lot of the other elements needed for fuel supply. The main sticking points are probably power density, fire safety (I don't think I'd want to share a tank with a stack of Li-ion cells) and charging in field. The first two are significant for domestic vehicles so may well get solved as a by-product. The third will no doubt keep a roof over the head of heads of number of defence researchers and consultants in coming years.

Since ww2 we had industry telling us what we need.

I know some people think battery operated AFV's is a joke, but the first country that develops a functionally useful system is going to enjoy fairly good strategic advantages – at least for awhile.

Yes of course if the tech and supporting tech, etc. is there. But at this point it seems that the tech is not ready for electric AFVs. Yet … AFAIK …

Since ww2 we had industry telling us what we need.

The military-industrial complex as Ike warned us. But regardless … we still need a well armed military with state-of-the-art equipment, etc.

" I have read many accounts of troops complaining about batteries dying, having to carry a lot of weight in batteries for various equipment, etc."

I was one of those complainers. The PRC-77 radio had batteries the size of bricks and weighed more than a brick. Extra batteries were assigned to everyone. I also had to carry batteries for my Dragon ATGM thermal sight. That stuff will sap stamina and endurance when you carry it for countless miles. When those batteries lost their charge we still had to carry them because they could be recharged. Now they were just dead weight with no purpose.

Even if they make the batteries lighter weight the troops will end up carrying more of them or additional ammunition.

In general, I think we are not there yet and need to be certain that our current capabilities will best meet our logistical needs in the field. This means good old gasoline/petrol is still vital. And our combat capabilities need to stay sharp.

Battery tech is developing so rapidly that change is coming. It is never smooth and easy, but we remain far ahead other nations on this and it will convey a substantial advantage at some point.

People make fun of EVs here sometimes.I am a believer. We are too used to the logistical chain of petro fuels and do not see how complex and cumbersome it is, from getting it out of the ground all the long way to getting it into vehicles in the field. As the Russians help demonstrate.

EVs and robotics are coming and the charging issue is not going to be the big factor that fuel dumps and fueling vehicles, along with processing, ocean transport, and vulnerability, that we accept from petro.

But like any transition, there will be bumps and we cannot have the cart get ahead of the horse, if I may use that phrase. The Pentagon needs to make sure we stay capable and not get carried away. And also, try planning better for procurement. Not every new toy is the answer, money is not endless. How many times do we have to fall back on tried and true when some big idea isn't ready?

Dragon +1 👍👍… been there – done that as well!

The Pentagon needs to make sure we stay capable and not get carried away.

Agreed, we need to be combat ready with the systems we have now. Not what the Go Green types, etc. hope we will have.

AI & robotics are coming … sooner than later. That is a good thing. As will EVs, but it may and I say may be easier to have parts of the civilian world go EV before the military. Right now with the goal of forcing us to go Green by destroying our fuel industry. To suite the few Green cultists. Or they won't vote for him/give campaign $ As it is, it seems the US elected leadership seems beholden to these types.

Shoving Green down the throats of the lower & middle classes, when the tech is not there yet. And the cost of everything is going up because of the self-inflicted wound of destroying our fuel industry. This will cost votes.

It has to be a gradual transition. Not what we see now. In many places in the US you can't find any EVs. Or can pay the high cost of buying it. Not to mention there are few if any charging locations. Which has to transition at the same time as EVs do. But again the Tech is not there yet …

"The military-industrial complex as Ike warned us. But regardless … we still need a well armed military with state-of-the-art equipment, etc."

slightly disagree we need stuff that works in the field in the conditions our teenagers find themselves.

need stuff that works in the field in the conditions our teenagers find themselves.

I very much agree, being a former Rifle Plt Ldr and then Mech Co. Cdr. in my youth. .

Plus we need what is authorize by TO&E. E.g. Rifle Plts in the 101 were authorize 2 LMGs/SAWs per Squad. We were issued a close pin bipod for some of our M16s and told to designate them SAW gunners …

My Mech Co was authorized 32 or 34 NVGs. We had 5, with 1 or 2 down for maint. …

I could go on … but the point is made …

If you learn anything in the Infantry … Not only do we need good equipment, but the right number based on the TO&E. So as often said, you adapt, overcome, etc., to get the mission done.

Here's a new priority from the current POTUS -- shifting resources from the VA over to DHS to cope with the ever-increasing flood of illegal migrants crossing the southern US border.

Critics Blast Biden Admin Attempt to Use Veteran Resources for Border Crisis

During his recent testimony before Congress, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas informed lawmakers that the Biden administration was considering diverting resources from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to deal with [snip] border [issues]. This includes not just funding but also VA nurses and doctors who are tasked with caring for America's veterans, and who may now be sent to care for illegal immigrants.

link

Oh, and more maternity leave and benefits for parents who are in the US Army. The new Pentagon plan for "soldiers who give birth" includes:

*Up to one year of paid maternity leave
*A one-year exemption for physical fitness tests and standards
*Paid fertility treatment and a one-year freeze on redeployments for anyone undergoing fertility treatment

link

Taking anything away from the VA would be criminal and then give it to criminals. Makes it that much worse. Illegal aliens are criminals. They deserve 0 and a ride back to where they came from.

Or Gitmo might be nice for some …

The VA is still coming back from the neglect of previous administrations and Congress, who should demand that they look at their own record on getting things done here. The last admin began to address this, as did the current one at first. Unless there is some context we are missing, and I can't imagine what it is, this is seriously wrong.

The VA was supported very well during the last admin in the DC. They didn't have to support illegal, Go Green, etc., etc.

The simple thought that this current DC leadership even considered to take money from the VA shows how out of touch things have become there. The Vets that go to the VA actually besides being "legal" Americans, actually did something to earn their VA privileges. Illegal aliens have done nothing but broke the law.

It makes no sense, period. I have never gotten what goes on at the border, but the VA is the last place I would look to take resources from for anything short of national disaster.

The border must be gotten under control. A country that can't control it's borders is no longer a country. It was under control 18 months ago and getting better. Just ask CBP, local LEOs, etc., etc.

Then a vocal minority in high places for various reasons decided open borders was a good idea. Moronic beyond belief …

Every cent used on illegal aliens is a waste … they are de facto criminals. Where do you put all these "criminals" ? Gitmo has a lot of open cells. With only 40 or so terrorists left there that no one wants.

If illegal aliens think they may go to Gitmo … that may slow up the flow. Along with completing the wall on the border, get CBP, etc. out of the business of nursemaiding criminals.