Working Mobile Basing for Australian Defense: The Case of the the 3CRU Detachment

09/25/2020

By Betina Mears

Joining units across the country to build the air surveillance picture, Air Force personnel from No. 3 Control and Reporting Unit (3CRU) deployed from RAAF Base Williamtown to the Corindi regional area in support of Exercise Lightning Storm.

A small of contingent of specialist technical and logistics personnel made the journey to northern NSW in convoy from their home base at RAAF Base Williamtown transporting a surveillance radar, communications cabin and satellite terminals to engage in real-time training scenarios. The team also included network specialists and cooks.

Exercise Lightning Storm comprises both overland and overwater defensive and offensive counter-air training activities across large portions of the east coast of Australia.

Established on the soccer fields in the outskirts of Corindi, 3CRU deployed TPS-77 radar capability to provide an essential surveillance picture which was transmitted by satellite to the unit’s control and reporting centre (CRC) at RAAF Base Williamtown.

Back home, skilled 3CRU personnel operated the CRC that provided tactical command and control of air operations.

3CRU Detachment Commander Flying Officer Andrew Winter said 3CRU’s support to the exercise ensured the data feed was maintained to support missions.

“Our team’s important contribution at the Corindi deployment site has provided operators within the CRC at Williamtown with vital data and surveillance information to manage aircraft postures, detect and track opposing aircraft and provide tactical direction to aircraft – essentially to assist in the coordination of the mission,” Flying Officer Winter said.

In addition to 3CRU’s assets, Exercise Lightning Storm included RAAF No. 114 Mobile Control and Reporting Unit’s deployable Mobile Control and Reporting Centre (MCRC) operating out of Oakey in Queensland, the E-7A Wedgetail, KC-30A multi-role tanker transports, F-35A Lightning and other fighter aircraft from Williamtown and Amberley air bases.

For 3CRU, the exercise delivered a number of important training outcomes.

3CRU Maintenance Manager for the deployment Sergeant Chris Andreou said junior members received important skilling accreditation which was vital for their role.

“Certification of newly posted maintenance personnel to the unit as a result of the exercise has ensured that personnel are operationally ready,” Sergeant Andreou said.

Additional unit training outcomes included category upgrades for air battle managers and air surveillance operators, integration with other command and control systems, validation of tactics, techniques and procedures to optimise operational integration with other weapon systems and more.

Reflecting on 3CRU’s training opportunities at the deployment site, Flying Officer Winter said he was incredibly proud of his team’s achievements, noting the unit had deployed to the Corindi area multiple times before.

“The team’s commitment and dedication to the task has no doubt ensured that capability has been maintained throughout the exercise,” he said.

“Successful deployment and training of this type would not be possible, however, without the community’s ongoing support, of which we are grateful.”

3CRU is part of Surveillance and Response Group’s No. 41 Wing, which delivers precision air defence and air battlespace management for the joint force.

This article was published by the Australian Department of Defence on September 9, 2020, and was entitled. “Eyes for the Sky opens from the Ground.”

The featured photo: Leading Aircraftman Nick Brown monitors the satellite link back to RAAF Williamtown from the Corindi showgrounds. Photo: Corporal Craig Barrett

Bulgaria and Breeze 2020 2

Twenty-six ships, nine aircraft and more than 2,000 sailors from eight NATO Allies and partner nations took part in Bulgarian Navy-led exercise Breeze, an annual maritime exercise held off the coast of Bulgaria in the Black Sea.

Breeze 2020 aimed to improve the readiness of all participants.

In addition to host country Bulgaria, countries represented included Belgium, Georgia, Greece, Italy, Romania, Spain and Turkey.

Standing NATO Maritime Group Two (SNMG2) and Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group Two (SNMCMG2) also participated.

The exercise ran from 10 to 19 July 2020.

This footage, courtesy of the Bulgarian Ministry of Defence, includes shots of ships from Allies and partner nations that participated in the exercise at sea.

BLACK SEA

07.18.2020

Video by Sophie Lambert

Natochannel

The Ground Combat Element in the Pacific Reset

09/24/2020

By Robbin Laird

As the USMC works its relationship with the US Navy, a core focus is upon how the Marine Corps can provide for enhanced sea control and sea denial.

A means to this end is an ability to move combat pieces on the chessboard of the extended battlespace.

But where does the ground combat element fight into this scheme for maneuver?

During my visit to MAWTS-1 in September 2020, I had a chance to discuss this with several USMC officers involved in the current Weapons and Tactics Instructor Course.

And training in the context of transition is no picnic. 

The key is to ensure that the USMC is combat capable today as it transitions to a new GCE that is lighter and more capable of tapping not into the air-maritime joint force, above and beyond what USMC integration provides.

As Col. Gillette, the CO of MAWTS-1 put it: “So long as I’ve been in the Marine Corps and the way that it still currently is today, marine aviation exists to support the ground combat.

“That’s why we exist. The idea that we travel light and that the aviation element within the MAGTAF provides or helps to provide the ground combat element with a significant capability is our legacy.

“We are now taking that legacy and adapting it.

“We are taking the traditional combat engagement where you have battalions maneuvering and aviation supporting that ground element and we are moving it towards Sea Control, and Sea Denial missions.

“We are reimagining the potential of what the infantry does.

“That doesn’t mean that they do that exclusively because, although I think that our focus in the Marine Corps, as the Commandant said, is shifting towards the Pacific that doesn’t relegate or negate the requirement to be ready to respond to all of the other things that the Marine Corps does.

“It might be less of a focus, but I don’t think that that negates our requirement to deal with a variety of core missions.

“It’s a question of working the balance in the training continuum.

“What does an infantry battalion train to? Do they train to a more traditional battalion in the attack or in the defense and then how do I use my aviation assets to support either one of those types of operations?”

“As opposed to, “I might have to take an island, a piece of territory that we’re going to use a mobile base, secure it so that we can continue to push chess pieces forward in the Pacific, in the Sea Control, Sea Denial end-state.”

“Those are two very different kind of skill sets. If there’s one thing that the Marine Corps is very good at it’s being very versatile and being able to switch from one to the other on relatively short order. But in order to do that, you have to have a very dedicated and well thought out training continuum so that people can do both well, because if you say that you can do it the expectation is that you can do it well.”

Obviously, this is a major challenge and during my visit I had a chance to talk with Major Fitzsimmons, the Ground Combat Department Head at MAWTS-1, who clearly is facing the challenges which his CO outlined,

So what is the future of the Ground Combat Element in a distributed Marine Corps force operating both in the blue waters and the littorals?

This is clearly a challenge being worked, with the GCE facing the challenge of dealing with more traditional tasks as well as adapting to the evolving reconfiguration for the maritime fight.

And it is a major shift facing the GCE for sure.

The GCE is shifting from its most recent experiences of fighting in the land wars as a primary mission to providing support to, in Major Fitzsimmons words, “a more amphibious distributed force operation.

“And in my view, this is a very big shift.”

Major Fitzsimmons provided a very helpful entry point into this discussion by recalling the earlier work which the Marines had done with the Company Landing Teams.

As Major Fitzsimmons put it: “The Company Landing Team was an experiment at how do we lighten the footprint of the force while still giving them the capabilities of what we see in larger forces today.

“To do that, we would leverage digital interoperability, connectivity, and reach back to weapon systems, to information, to targeting, to any of those capabilities that you generally see at some of the higher echelons that were not organic to a infantry company at that time.

“The challenge then is to ensure that the infantry company has access to those types of capabilities and mature the force.”

What Major Fitzsimmons meant by maturing the force was discussed later in the conversation.

He highlighted the importance of having Marines earlier in their career able to work with various elements of the joint force, because they would need to leverage those capabilities as part of the more distributed GCE.

The Company Landing Team experiment also raised questions about equipment and personnel.

“How do we reinforce the CLT and how do we augment it with enablers?

“How do we augment it or enhance it with more proficient and more experienced fires personnel?

“How do we augment it with small UAS capabilities?

“How do we augment and enhance it with digital interoperability?

“How do they communicate with their organic radios across multiple waveforms?

“Who are they talking to?

“What is their left and right for decisions?

“Do they have fires approval?

“Would the company commander have fires approval, or would he have to do what we were having to do in Afghanistan and Iraq, where I’ve got to call my boss and then the boss’s boss, in order to get fires employed?””

With the introduction of the new Marine Corps Littoral regiment, it is clear that these aspects of the CLT experiment are relevant to the way ahead.

As Col. Gillette noted: “We are shaping a new Marine Littoral Regiment, MLR, but we’re still in the nascent stages of defining what are the critical tasks that something like that needs to be able to do and then how you train to it.

“How do we create not only the definition of the skill sets that we need to train large formations to, but then what venues must we have to train?”

Major Fitzsimmons is an infantry officer with fires experience at the company and battalion level, and clearly is focused on the key aspect of how you enable smaller and less organically capable forces in the extended battlespace and ensure that they have adequate fires to execute its missions.

And in dealing with peer competitors, clearly the ability to link the GCE with fires requires the right kinds of communication capabilities.

As Major Fitzsimmons put it: “We are going to have to be significantly more distributed and quiet with respect to our emissions signatures than we have in the past.”

A major challenge facing the GCE is the range of adaptability that they will have to be able to deliver and operate with in the future.

As Col. Gillette noted earlier, the variety of skill sets required will be varied and tailorable.

How to train to best deliver such capability?

As Major Fitzsimmons put it: “I think the biggest shock to my community is going to be the level of adaptability that we’re going to have to be able to achieve.

“We are going to have to train smaller forces to operate more autonomously and to possess the ability to achieve effects on the battlefield previously created at higher echelons.”

He focused as well on the tailorable aspect envisaged as well.

“We will need to be tactically tailored to achieve whatever effect we need.

“It should be akin to a menu; based on the mission and the effects needed to shape the environment towards mission accomplishment, we will need this capability or that capability which may require each element to be manned and equipped differently.”

Then there is the challenge of the sustainability of the tailored force.

How to ensure the logistics support for the distributed maritime focused USMC GCE?

In short, fighting with the force you have while you transition to a new one is a major challenge facing the trainers for the USMC going forward.

Featured Photo: U.S. Marines with Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 3d Marine Regiment, participate in an amphibious assault exercise, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, May 28, 2020. Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 3d Marine Regiment, and Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 3d Marine Regiment, conducted an amphibious assault exercise and military operations in urban terrain to increase littoral mobility proficiency in 3d Marine Regiment and advance the goals of the Commandant of the Marine Corps 2030 Force Design. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Matthew Kirk)

MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, HI, UNITED STATES

05.28.2020

UAE-Based Al Tariq Enhancing PGM Range

09/23/2020

By Guy Martin

AL TARIQ (formerly Barij Dynamics) continues to enhance its ‘Al Tariq’ range of precision-guided munitions (PGMs) and is about to start production on the improved Block II version.

Theunis Botha, Chief Executive Officer of AL TARIQ, told defenceWeb that the upgraded Block II version includes a variety of new operational features for the Mk 81 and Mk 82 bomb kits. He said: “We are currently in the process of starting our planned production for the Block II version towards the end of 2020, and are also expanding the range to include the Mk 83 and Mk 84 in the next 12-18 months.”

AL TARIQ, originally established as a joint venture with Denel Dynamics, is now part of the Missiles & Weapons cluster within the Abu Dhabi-based EDGE defence group. The company has produced a large number of Al Tariq guidance kits for the Mk 81 (250 lb) and Mk 82 (500 lb) bombs, mainly for the UAE Air Force’s Mirage 2000-9s and other aircraft in the fleet.

The Block II version features an upgraded navigation system, and a pre-flight power source – to reduce the weapon’s independence on the carrying aircraft’s electrical power.

The Al Tariq comes in two main variants: the Al Tariq S and the Al Tariq LR – which have different seekers, payload sizes and wing kit options as well as multiple configurations – as the company looks to add a new payload and fusing system for a height adjustable airburst option (Height-Of-Burst-Sensor).

The Al Tariq S has a range of 40 km, and the Al Tariq LR has a wing kit that extends range to 120 km. Botha, speaking during a recent webinar, said Al Tariq still has the longest demonstrated range on the market.

On a Mk 81 payload, the Al Tariq S has a mass of 212 kg, whereas it is 268 kg on the Al Tariq LR. As for the Mk 82 payload, its mass is 310 kg and 366 kg, respectively. The Al Tariq can be launched at a maximum speed of Mach 0.9 from an altitude of 40 000 feet. Its impact speed is programmable while the impact angle can be programmed between 30 and 90 degrees.

There are three main guidance configurations: accuracy with GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) is approximately 10 metres CEP (circular error probable); with GNSS semi-active laser it is three metres CEP, and with GNSS imaging infrared with automatic target recognition, it goes down to two metres CEP. The Al Tariq S can engage targets up to 90 degrees off-axis, while the Al Tariq LR can engage targets up to 180 degrees off-axis. Targeting can be either locked on before, or after, launch.

Botha said AL TARIQ has benefitted from the UAE being its launch customer but is looking to grow the business outside the UAE, and has already accomplished successful demonstrations in other countries. “We have a very good product; we believe in it,” he said, commenting on the demand for Al Tariq kits.

“The intention is to grow the market even further – beyond the Middle East and North Africa. We are expanding our footprint, though COVID-19 has put a bit of a delay in our plans in the business development domain. Being ITAR-free will help in this process,” he added.

AL TARIQ was originally known as Tawazun Dynamics as it was a partnership between Denel Dynamics and Tawazun. In October 2018, the company rebranded itself as Barij Dynamics after investment from the Emirates Defence Industry Company (EDIC). In November 2019, the company later became AL TARIQ when it was consolidated along with 25 other UAE defence entities, under EDGE.

This article was published by defenceWeb on September 7, 2020.

According to the Al Tariq website:

AL TARIQ is a world-class manufacturer of precision-guided air munitions. Partnering with Denel Dynamics, South Africa’s largest government-owned defence manufacturer, we have enhanced our production capacity through cutting-edge technology and continual innovation.

Our kits come in easy-to-handle-and-deploy packages and achieve precision targeting via choice systems including GNSS/INS, Imaging Infrared (IIR) with complete Automatic Target Recognition (ATR) capabilities, and semi-active laser seekers against high-priority fixed, off-axis, moving, and relocatable targets.

Leveraging the latest advanced technologies gives us an edge in optics, propulsion, and weapons. This allows our engineering teams to create intellectual property across disciplines, including software development and mechanical design. This keeps us and you ahead, always…..

The rising challenges in airborne defence require combat-driven munitions that are smaller, smarter, and faster. At AL TARIQ, we meet these growing demands by delivering a continuum of solutions, including design, manufacturing and supply chain. Our goal to change the face of air defence is driven by innovation, advanced technology, and added value.

1 MEF

I Marine Expeditionary Force (I MEF) is a globally responsive, expeditionary, and fully scalable Marine Air Ground Task Force, capable of generating, deploying, and employing ready forces and formations for crisis response, forward presence, major combat operations, and campaigns.

I MEF demonstrates their combat readiness by showcasing reach, tactical operations, and amphibious capabilities in various exercises and operations throughout the globe.

07.21.2020

Video by Cpl. Jennifer Gay, Lance Cpl. Garrett Kiger and Lance Cpl. Abigail Paul

I Marine Expeditionary Force

Visiting MAWTS-1, September 2020: A Discussion with Col. Gillette About Shaping a Way Ahead

09/22/2020

By Robbin Laird

Prior to my visit in early September 2020, I conducted a series of teleconferences with MAWTS-1 officers in the late Spring and early Summer. The focus of those discussions was upon mobile and expeditionary basing and how the training for this key capability was being shaped going forward for the Marines.

During this visit, I had a chance to engage with a number of MAWTS-1 officers and with the CO of MAWTS-1, Colonel Gillette with regard to the focus and training with regard to the USMC’s emphasis on their contribution to naval warfare.

Question: “How is the Marine Corps going to contribute most effectively to the Pacific mission in terms of Sea Control and Sea Denial? And how to best contribute to the defensive and offensive operations affecting the SLOCs?

And I think both questions highlight the challenge of shaping a force with enough flexibility to have pieces on the chess board and to move them effectively to shape combat success.

Col. Gillette: “Working through how the USMC can contribute effectively to sea control and sea denial for the joint force is a key challenge. The way I see it, is the question of how to insert force in the Pacific where a key combat capability is to bring assets to bear on the Pacific chessboard. The long-precision weapons of adversaries are working to expand their reach and shape an opportunity to work multiple ways inside and outside those strike zones to shape the battlespace.

“What do we need to do in order to bring our assets inside the red rings, our adversaries are seeking to place on the Pacific chessboard?

“How do you bring your chess pieces onto the board in a way that ensures or minimizes both the risk to the force and enhances the probability of a positive outcome for the mission? How do you move assets on the chessboard inside those red rings which allows us to bring capabilities to bear on whatever end state we are trying to achieve?

“For the USMC, as the Commandant has highlighted, it is a question of how we can most effectively contribute to the air-maritime fight. For us, a core competence is mobile basing which clearly will play a key part in our contribution, whether projected from afloat or ashore.

“What assets need to be on the chess board at the start of any type of escalation? What assets need to be brought to bear and how do you bring them there? I think mobile basing is part of the discussion of how you bring those forces to bear.

“How do you bring forces afloat inside the red rings in a responsible way so that you can bring those pieces to the chess board or have them contribute to the overall crisis management objectives? How do we escalate and de-escalate force to support our political objectives?

“How do we, either from afloat or ashore, enable the joint Force to bring relevant assets to bear on the crisis and then once we establish that force presence, how do we manage it most effectively?

“How do we train to be able to do that?

“What integration in the training environment is required to be able to achieve such an outcome in an operational setting in a very timely manner?

Question: Ever since the revival of the Bold Alligator exercises, I have focused on how the amphibious fleet can shift form its greyhound bus role to shaping a task force capable of operating in terms of sea denial and sea control. With the new America-class ships in the fleet, this clearly is the case.

How do you view the revamping of the amphibious fleet in terms of providing new for the USMC and the US Navy to deliver sea control and sea denial?

Col. Gillette:  “The traditional approach for the amphibious force is move force to an area of interest. Now we need to look at the entire maritime combat space, and ask how we can contribute to that combat space, and not simply move force from A to B.

“I think the first leap is to think of the amphibious task force, as you call it, to become a key as pieces on the chess board. As with any piece, they have strengths and weaknesses. Some of the weaknesses are clear, such as the need for a common operational picture, a command and control suite to where the assets that provide data feeds to a carrier strike group are also incorporated onto L-Class shipping. We’re working on those things right now, in order to bring the situational awareness of those types of ships up to speed with the rest of the Naval fleet.

Question: A key opportunity facing the force is to reimagine how to use the assets the force has now but working them in new innovative integratable ways or, in other words, rethinking how to use assets that we already have but differently.

How do you view this opportunity?

Col. Gillette: “We clearly need to focus on the critical gaps which are evident from working a more integrated force.   I think that the first step is to reimagine what pieces can be moved around the board for functions that typically in the past haven’t been used in the new way.

“That’s number one. Number two, once you say, “Okay, well I have all these LHA/LHD class shipping and all the LPDs et cetera that go along with the traditional MEU-R, is there a ship that I need to either tether to that MEU-R to give it a critical capability that’s autonomous? Or do I just need to have a way to send data so that they have the same sensing of the environment that they’re operating in, using sensors already in the carrier strike group, national assets, Air Force assets et cetera?”

“In other words, the ship might not have to be tethered to a narrowly defined task force but you just need to be able to have the information that everybody else does so that you can make tactical or operational decisions to employ that ship to the max extent practical of its capabilities.

“There is a significant shift underway. The question we are now posing is: “What capability do I need and can I get it from a sister service that already has something that provides the weapons, the C2 or the ISR that I need?”

“I need to know how exploit information which benefits either my situational awareness, my offensive or defensive capability of my organic force. But you don’t necessarily need to own it in order to benefit from it.

“And I think that when we really start talking about integration, that’s probably one of the things that we could realize very quickly is that there are certain, assets and data streams that come from the Air Force or the Navy that make the USMC a more lethal and effective force, and vice versa.

“The key question becomes: “How do I get the most decisive information into an LHA/LHD? How do I get it into a marine unit so that they can benefit from that information and then act more efficiently or lethally when required?”

Question: We first met when you were at Eglin where you were working the F-35 warfare system into the USMC. Now that the F-35s are becoming a fact of life for both the US services and the allies in the Pacific, how can we best leverage that integratable capability?

Col. Gillette: “The development is a significant one. It is not only a question of interoperability among the F-35 fleet, it is the ability to have common logistical and support in the region with your allies, flying the same aircraft with the same parts. And the big opportunity comes with regard to the information point I made earlier. We are in the early stages of exploiting what the F-35 force can provide in terms of information dominance in the Pacific, but the foundation has been laid.

“And when we highlight the F-35 as the 21st century version of what the World War II Navy called the big blue blanket with the redundancy and the amount of information that could be utilized, it’s pretty astonishing if you think about it.

“The challenge is to work the best ways to sort through the information resident in the F-35 force and then how do you utilize it in an effective and efficient way for the joint force. But the foundation is clearly there.

Question: Clearly, the new focus on the maritime battle, requires a shift in USMC training. How are you approaching that challenge?

Col. Gillette:  “So long as I’ve been in the Marine Corps and the way that it still currently is today, marine aviation exists to support the ground combat. That’s why we exist. The idea that we travel light and that the aviation element within the MAGTAF provides or helps to provide the ground combat element with a significant capability is our legacy.

“We are now taking that legacy and adapting it. We are taking the traditional combat engagement where you have battalions maneuvering and aviation supporting that ground element and we are moving it towards Sea Control, and Sea Denial missions.

“We are reimagining the potential of what the infantry does. That doesn’t mean that they do that exclusively because, although I think that our focus in the Marine Corps, as the Commandant said, is shifting towards the Pacific that doesn’t relegate or negate the requirement to be ready to respond to all of the other things that the Marine Corps does.

“It might be less of a focus, but I don’t think that that negates our requirement to deal with a variety of core missions.

“It’s a question of working the balance in the training continuum. What does an infantry battalion train to? Do they train to a more traditional battalion in the attack or in the defense and then how do I use my aviation assets to support either one of those types of operations?” As opposed to, “I might have to take an island, a piece of territory that we’re going to use a mobile base, secure it so that we can continue to push chess pieces forward in the Pacific, in the Sea Control, Sea Denial end-state.”

“Those are two very different kind of skill sets. If there’s one thing that the Marine Corps is very good at it’s being very versatile and being able to switch from one to the other on relatively short order. But in order to do that, you have to have a very dedicated and well thought out training continuum so that people can do both well, because if you say that you can do it the expectation is that you can do it well.

“We are shaping a new Marine Littoral Regiment, MLR, but we’re still in the nascent stages of defining what are the critical tasks that something like that needs to be able to do and then how you train to it.

“How do we create not only the definition of the skill sets that we need to train large formations to, but then what venues must we have to train?

“How to best combine simulated environments with real world training out on a range?

“We’re working through all that right now and it’ll be interesting to watch how that process unfolds,

“But it is definitely a mind shift to rethink the context in which our Ground Combat forces will conduct offensive of defensive operations, and specifically, what tasks they are expected to be capable of in this environment.”

“What we’ve done in the past is very well-defined and we have a very defined training continuum for those large formations. In this new role in the Pacific, that’s something that I think over the next few years we’ll get our arms around and we will learn from doing. As we start to field these formations out to the Pacific we’ll really start to figure out where are we good at training and where are gaps that we need to close and shape the venues and methods to fill those in those gaps.

“We’re constantly looking at new venues and new methods to start to do the things that we need to do with the new approach.

“For example, we are taking our TACAIR Community up to the Nellis range for large integrated strike missions. We do face-to-face planning with the Air Force and Navy so that our students can understand the capabilities and limitations of these different platforms. They rub elbows with the USAF and Navy operators and gain first-hand knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of these different platforms.

“Then we fly them all back home and then the next night we go out with this huge armada of joint assets. And it’s, out of the assets that play on this, it’s probably 50% Marines and the other 50% are Growlers, Air Force platforms et cetera. And then we do a mass debrief.

“And this starts to chip away at the legacy perspective: “Okay, I’m a master of my machine.” They come to WTI and learn how to think an integrated manner.  But more importantly, they get exposed and actually go out and do the integration with joint service assets to see the strengths and weaknesses so that they understand the planning considerations required for the joint fight against peer competitors and how to work beyond what their Marine Corps platform can do.

“Another example is when we do what we call our Offensive Anti-Air Warfare, OAAW Evolution. We fight peer versus peer against one another. We have real-time intelligent collects on what the other side is doing, so the plans change real-time, airborne and on the ground. There’s deception; there’s decoys. It’s pretty amazing to watch and oh, by the way, they get to use their weapons systems, their command and control systems to the fullest extent of their capabilities on both sides. This allows us to engage a thinking, breathing enemy who is well-trained and has all the latest and greatest systems, but they do that with assets that not are resident just to the Marine Corps.

“We operate with assets that come from the Department of Defense to show them the importance, on both sides, whether it’s the C3 with their surface-to-air missiles and their own red fighters or the blue fighters with both organic assets, as well as national assets.

“We are focused on operating, not just with the assets that you control, the ones that sit out on our flight line or sit in our command and control, but how these other things can contribute in the joint fight. And to shape effect methods to get the enabling information, digest it and then use it in near real-time.

“It’s pretty interesting to watch and the outcomes of this evolution are wildly different, based on the ability of the students to use these things that they’re not used to working with, incorporate them in real-time into their plan and then execute. Which I think, if you were to look at any high-end conflict or contingency where you have similarly matched forces in terms of training and gear. That will make the difference between somebody who is wildly successful or wildly unsuccessful, with your ability to direct and use those things real-time being a crucial delineator to combat success.

Question: How do you see the growth of simulation in this training approach?

Col. Gillette: “You can never just say, “I’m going to train only in a simulated environment.” The simulated environment is good for a number of reasons. One key contribution is your ability to connect simulators, pick whatever platform it is.

“We are working with the surface warfare elements of the USN to incorporate synthetic/real training. What that will enable us to do is, take live fly events with their simulator event and start to fuse those two worlds, the simulated world as well as the live fly. And this allows us to create, not only a complex, robust environment that has airplanes, real airplanes, synthetic airplanes, synthetic ships, both good and bad, but then go out to try and then solve a problem in that environment.

“We’re just starting to put our big toe into this new environment, but what I think what we will find is that a surface warfare officer can learn how might a F-35 sense something that they would then prioritize high enough that they would want to shoot with one of their organic weapons.

“If I could I’d have every joint asset come to our WTI exercise, every class and integrate with our people. The reality is, due to real-world realties, these high-demand, low-density assets will not be free to come.

“However, if I could create a simulated environment where I could get reps from an F-35 perspective, from a Viper, it doesn’t matter what platform it is, but they get used to thinking about receiving and then executing off the information that would come from one of those high-demand, low-density assets. I think what it will do is make our ability to then plug and play in a future contingency.

“Another piece of the puzzle is to determine: how do we go from the simulator to a blending of live event with some amount of simulation mixed in there to create the contested environment?

“And a lot of people define what is a contested environment differently, but what you’ll be able to do is to create an environment which you actually go fly in, from Marine Aviation’s perspective, against a threat that’s both real and simulated.

“We will shape a blended training environment as opposed to, “I do simulators and then I try to replicate it as best I can out on the range with real things.” There’ll be requirements to have real things out on the range but there will be a blending, which, from the operator’s perspective, it will be no different than a completely live environment.

Col. Steve E. Gillette

Colonel Gillette attended the University of Nebraska and graduated with a Bachelor’s of Science degree in Economics, in May 1996.

Colonel Gillette attended The Basic School (TBS) in November 1996. Upon completion of TBS in May 1997, he underwent Naval aviation training in Pensacola, Florida and Kingsville, Texas, and was designated a Naval Aviator in May 1999. Colonel Gillette was assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron (VMFAT) 101 aboard Marine Corps Air Station Miramar in San Diego, California for F/A-18 fleet replacement training.

In September 2000, Captain Gillette reported to Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 232 as an F/A-18 pilot. During this three-year tour with the “Red Devils,” he deployed in support of the Unit Deployment Program and in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He served as a Schedules Officer, Flight Officer, and Assistant Maintenance Officer.

In August 2003, Captain Gillette reported to the Expeditionary Warfare School aboard Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia.

In June 2004, Captain Gillette was assigned to Marine All-Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 242 serving as the Pilot Training Officer. He deployed to Al Asad Airbase, Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. After returning from deployment, Captain Gillette attended the Weapons and Tactics Instructor (WTI) course, and in July 2005, attended the Naval Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN).

In July 2006, Major Gillette reported to Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One to serve as an F/A-18 instructor. During this tour, he held the billets of Assistant Operations Officer and F/A-18 Division Head.

Major Gillette was selected to attend Marine Corps Command and Staff College located in Quantico, Virginia.  He earned a Master’s Degree in National Security and Strategic Studies, and was a distinguished graduate.

In July 2010, Major Gillette joined VMFAT-501 aboard Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. While assigned to the “Warlords,” he served as the Executive Officer. During this tour, Major Gillette completed his transition to the F-35B aircraft, and served as an F-35B instructor pilot.

In September 2013, Lieutenant Colonel Gillette assumed command of VMFA-121. During his tour with the “Green Knights,” VMFA-121 became the first USMC F-35B squadron to achieve Initial Operating Capability, and was named the USMC Fighter Squadron of the Year. In July 2015, Lieutenant Colonel Gillette assumed the duties of Marine Aircraft Group 13 Executive Officer, and was selected as the Marine Aviator of the Year.

In June 2016, Lieutenant Colonel Gillette was then assigned as the Military Assistant to the Executive Secretary, Office of the Secretary of Defense.

In August 2016, Lieutenant Colonel Gillette attended Top Level School at the National War College where he received a Master’s Degree in National Security Strategy.

Colonel Gillette is currently serving as the Commanding Officer of Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One.

For our 2013 interview with then Lt. Col. Gillette at Eglin AFB:

Declaring IOC for the F-35B and Going to Japan: Lt. Col. Gillette Discusses the Approach

The featured photo: Lieutenant Colonel Steve E. Gillette, the Commanding Officer of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 based out of Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Ariz., shows his squadron’s F-35B hangar to Maj. Gen. Juan G. Ayala, the Commander of Marine Corps Installations Command, Tuesday. VMFA-121 is the first operational F-35 squadron in the Marine Corps and the Department of Defense. Yuma, Arizona, December 3, 2013.

 

The Role of Heavy Lift in USMC Support for the Maritime Fight

09/21/2020

By Robbin Laird

During my discussions earlier this year with a number of MAWTS-1 officers, we focused on the thinking and training of the USMC to further enhance their capabilities for mobile and expeditionary basing.

Obviously, the insertion of force into a flexible basing environment requires lift capabilities, and with rapid insertion, movement and withdrawal of force being a key enabler for able to work an effective basing chessboard, heavy lift is a key enabler.

And heavy lift really comes in two forms: fixed wing aircraft, and rotorcraft. My guide in the discussion of the lift-basing dynamic earlier this year was Major James Everett, head of the Assault Support Department at MAWTS-1.  In that discussion, we focused on the importance of the CH-53E and the new aircraft, the CH-53K in enabling mobile and expeditionary basing.

In September 2020, we met at MAWTS-1 to continue our discussion.

But the focus of my visit was on addressing the challenges the Marines face in supporting the US Navy in terms of the maritime fight. 

In particular, my discussions with Colonel Gillette, the CO of MAWTS-1 focused on two key questions: “How is the Marine Corps going to contribute most effectively to the Pacific mission in terms of Sea Control and Sea Denial? And how to best contribute to the defensive and offensive operations affecting the SLOCs?

We addressed how to answer these questions from the standpoint of the assault support force.

As Major Everett put it: “a key focus of effort for the assault support community is upon how we can best assist through expeditionary basing to provide for sea control.

“We’re trying to get away from any permanent type of land basing in a maritime contested environment.”

A key enabler for flexible basing inserts or operations from the maritime fleet, inclusive of the amphibious ships, are the capabilities which the Marine Corps has with its  tiltrotor and rotorcraft community, This community  provides an ability to insert a sizable force without the need for airstrips of the size which a KC-130J would need.

Or put in another way, the Marines can look at basing options and sustainability via air either in terms of basing options where a fixed wing aircraft must operate, or, in a much wider set of cases, where vertical lift assets can operate.

The third is obviously by sea, which depends on support by a mother ship or a Military Sealift Command (MSC) ship, but the challenge for the Marines is that moving bases deeper into the maritime area of operations creates enhanced challenges for the MSC and raises questions about viable sustainable options.

We have already seen this challenge with regard to the littoral combat ship fleet, where the MSC is not eager to move into the littorals to supply a smaller ship, but it is much more willing to take its ships into a task force environment with significant maritime strike capability to give it protection.

The most flexibility for the mobile or expeditionary basing options clearly comes from vertical lift support aircraft. 

The challenge is that the current CH-53E fleet has been heavily tasked by the more than a decade of significant engagement in the Middle East.

The Marines unlike the US Army did not bring back their heavy lift helicopters for deep maintenance but focused on remaining engaged in the fight by doing the just enough maintenance to continue safe and effective flight operations in theater.

As Major Everett put it: “The Army brought their helicopters back from Afghanistan and they’d strip them down to the frame and they’d rebuild them basically. We just didn’t do that.”

This means that the heavy lift operational force inventory is relatively low compared to the required capabilities.

And as the focus shifts to the Pacific, with its tyranny of distance and the brutal operating conditions often seen in the maritime domain, having a very robust airlift fleet becomes not a nice to have, but a foundational element.

The replacement for the E, the CH-53K, will provide a significant enhancement to the lift capability, and sustainability in operations as well.

It is also a question of being able to deliver combat support speed or CSS to the mobile or expeditionary base, and clearly the combination of tiltrotor and heavy lift can do that.

But the challenge will be having adequate numbers of such assets, notably, because the nature of the environment is very challenging, and the operational demand will go up significantly if one wants to operate a distributed force but one which is sustained and protected by an integrated force.

As Major Everett put it: “There’s no way with the types of shipping and numbers of shipping we have, that we could possibly carry enough aircraft on that shipping to enable any type of land control without 53s.”

An aspect that makes the upgraded heavy lift fleet a key enabler for expeditionary basing will be the installation of a mesh network manager into the digital cockpit of the CH-53K, and its build into the legacy aircraft as well. This makes it part of an integratable force, not just an island presence force.

As Major Everett put it: “The core kind of skills that 53 pilots train to, are not going to change.

“But obviously the physicality of the new helicopter is very different.

“It can lift more relevant materials or assets and in larger numbers.

“It holds the 463L pallets that allow for rapid off and on-loads from the fixed wing aircraft which could provide distribution points for the heavy lift fleet.

“Additionally, the impact of the CH-53K’s integrated digital interoperability and its integration into the kill web will be significant.”

In short, the desire to have a Marine Corps enhanced role in sea control and sea denial with an island strategy really enhances the importance of heavy lift helicopters.

MAWTS-1 WTI 1-20 from SldInfo.com on Vimeo.

For our report on the CH-53K, see the following:

Northern Lighting Exercise, 2020

According to an article by Captain Joe Travato published on August 9, 2020 in the Wisconsin Rapids City Times:

Volk Field Combat Readiness Training Center is hosting approximately 50 aircraft and nearly 1,000 personnel from the National Guard, Air Force, Army, and Navy as part of the annual Northern Lightning Counterland training exercise, which runs Aug. 10-21.

Units from California, Idaho, Minnesota, New York, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin will all participate in the exercise.

Northern Lightning began in the early 2000s before expanding into a large-scale exercise in 2015. It became a biannual exercise in 2018 and 2019, and returned to an annual exercise in 2020.

Northern Lightning is a tactical level, joint training exercise replicating today’s air battle space with current and future weapons platforms. A variety of the world’s most advanced aircraft including fifth generation aircraft like the F-35 will participate in the exercise.

Volk Field CRTC is one of the premier training installations and airspaces in the country, thanks to its expansive airspace and the quality of the training the installation can simulate.

Northern Lightning is one of seven Air National Guard joint accredited exercises held at a Combat Readiness Training Center, and the installation’s reputation as one of the country’s finest training areas continues to grow.

Likewise, Northern Lightning has grown into a world-class exercise.

“We are excited to continue conducting our annual Northern Lightning exercise at Volk Field,” said Colonel Bart Van Roo, the exercise director. “This exercise will focus on offensive counter-air with simulated surface-to-air attacks, and the integration of multiple air platforms. Training in this manner is essential for readiness and enhancing partnerships.”

Van Roo said the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic necessitated some changes to the annual exercise’s structure, but the training will be invaluable.

“We’ve had to make some adjustments due to COVID,” he said. “Though we still have more than 50 aircraft and approximately 1000 personnel participating, far fewer will be staging out of Volk Field in order to mitigate public health risks. Even amid a pandemic the Air National Guard and our active-duty partners stand ready to complete whatever mission our country asks of us.”

Pilots and air crews participating in Northern Lightning can expect to operate in a contested environment with adversary aircraft, electronic jamming and simulated surface-to-air threats, and such training is critical to building readiness for the threats and missions the nation faces.

The Volk Field website added this information about the exercise:

VISION: Deliver a premier Air National Guard joint training environment replicating today’s battle space with current and future weapons platforms.

OBJECTIVE: Provide a tactical level, joint training exercise emphasizing user defined objectives resulting in tailored, scenario based, full-spectrum, high-end training.

FOCUS: Opposed Air Interdiction and Close Air Support against a highly integrated air defense system composed of relevant surface-to-air and air-to-air threats in a contested/degraded operational (CDO) environment.

MISSIONS: Offensive/Defensive Counter Air (OCA/DCA), Suppression/Destruction of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD/DEAD), and Close Air Support (CAS)

Emphasis placed on Joint integration of 4th and 5th generation assets from the Air National Guard, Air Force, Navy and Marines