A U.S. Marine Corps CH-53E Super Stallion with Marine Heavy Helicopter Training Squadron (HMHT)-302, prepares for take-off at Marine Corps Air Station New River, North Carolina, August 1, 2019.
HMHT-302 provided aerial transport support to 2nd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment during a Regimental Field Exercise.
NC, UNITED STATES
08.01.2019
Video by Pfc. Gavin Umboh
2nd Marine Aircraft Wing
U.S. Marines with Combat Logistics Battalion 2 Combat Logistics Regiment 2, 2nd Marine Logistics Group attach and unhook a package to a MV-22 Osprey during a helicopter support team external lift as part of integrated training exercise 5-19 on Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, California, July 28, 2019.
The purpose of ITX 5-19 is to create a challenging, realistic training environment that produces combat-ready forces capable of operating as an integrated Marine Air Ground Task Force.
TWENTYNINE PALMS, CA, UNITED STATES
07.28.2019
Video by Lance Cpl. Fatima Villatoro
2nd Marine Logistics Group
By Ed Timperlake and Robbin Laird
Our team tries its best to help those who are supporting our warfighters. Indeed, the entire mission of the Second Line of Defense team has been to highlight those who provide support for those in combat and those who have returned to civilian life.
When Ed Timperlake met Susan Ullman, it was a natural fit for us to sit down with her and to share her narrative with our readers and to solicit broader support for the foundation which she helped launch.
We had a chance to talk with Susan on August 23, 2019 and she provided us both with her personal narrative but how her personal experience drove her to seek new solutions so that spouses like her who confronted the tragic loss of a warrior spouse would not end up like she and her family did in times of crisis.
From our perspective, we clearly admire those who deal with life’s adversaries but not giving up but shaping new solutions. And in that way, the creation of the Warrior2Warrior foundation has been an expression of shaping a way ahead for Susan Ullman and those who find themselves in a similar situation.
Susan Ullman: “I was married to a special operator, who was a Sergeant First Class in the Green Berets. After his retirement, he was showing signs of fraying. He was struggling but I am not suggesting that he had post-traumatic stress disorder. He was starting to have some issues that were affecting him at work, such as showing up late and drinking more and becoming more difficult at home.
“He knew that something was wrong and that he was making poor decisions. He didn’t really understand why but was adamant that we not go through traditional channels to try to get him some help. Because he was so concerned about being viewed as the weak link or feeling marginalized. Even if it’s self-imposed, he didn’t want to be viewed in that manner.
“We went outside the system, we paid in cash as opposed to using our medical insurance to see a therapist. The therapist experience was short lived unfortunately. She felt she could help him and in fact her words were, “I know I can help you, but I’m going to have to break you down a little bit and then rebuild you back up.” His response to that was, “But then I won’t be a good Green Beret.” That was the last time he visited with the therapist because he felt that getting help for himself would in some way make him less of a fighter, less of a threat on the battlefield, less of a man.”
“It was just a very unfortunate choice because things truly went downhill from that point and within a year, he had taken his life. It was just a shocking trajectory down, then it happened, once it started, it happened very quickly and I didn’t really know who to go to. I felt like we’d exhausted whatever resources were available to us in a safe way, meaning a way that my husband was willing to make use of them. He just, he didn’t want me talking to anyone in his chain of command, understandably, he didn’t want me talking to his teammates. We were very limited in what was available to us, so we believed.”
Susan then that following her husband’s death so reached out to the Special Operations Command to discuss her experience in part to sort out in her mind whether they were other options available which they might have taken. She called the head of the Special Operations Command, Admiral McRaven and when she reached his office spoke with the Admiral’s Executive Officer. The XO spent some time with her on the call, who then asked her what she thought might have helped her husband.
Susan Ullman: “I’m not here to malign the military, my husband loved being a special operator, and my goal in calling is to find out what I missed. Because surely if I missed some program that would have provided help for both of us, then other people are missing it as well. I’m not a rocket scientist, but I’m halfway intelligent and if it’s there, I should have seen it. What did I miss so that I can go spread the words to other spouses that I know?”
The XO, Captain Chebby, asked “What did you have in mind about a program?” And Susan responded: “I think, some very elemental things, some kind of mentorship program, from a peer. Just something outside the box.”
The XO then told her that he would call her back the next day after he would make some further calls.
Notably, he actually did what he said, namely, called Susan back the next day.
The XO told her: “I spoke with Admiral McRaven, would you like to head up a suicide prevention working group?”
She was more than a bit surprised but agreed to do so. This meant that she would have to sort through a path to do so and to sort out means and approaches to do so. It is from this beginning that the Foundation was born.
Susan Ullman: Our goal was to try to incubate deinstitutionalized approaches to the very normal stressors associated with a lifetime of service. Whether that included combat or not, just a lifetime of service.
“We were made up of surviving spouses and other special operators who had come forward and self-reported as having either post-traumatic stress disorder or perhaps a drug issue, and then they ended up being able to overcome those issues.
“We wanted them on the working group to find out, how did they go about doing that? Did they find support within command?
“I think we had a fantastic group and we really did put forward a couple of very interesting ideas that I believe, and I still believe now, six and a half years later, would have rung true with special operators for sure.
“Unfortunately, we were shot down a lot by the system.
“ Pretty much every main program that we kind of got to the developmental stage, ultimately the JAG or someone in behavioral health who was kind of monitoring our working group would say, “We can’t do that because it’s a violation of privacy,” or, “We can’t do this one that you guys suggested because JAG feels that, here’s why JAG’s against it.”
“Every idea that we came up with was basically just dismissed, summarily dismissed, which was heartbreaking. After about a year, I finally, even though I was, directed to group, I ended up stepping away and said, “I’m not interested in participating anymore because I really feel like this is not going to work.”
To this stage, Ullman was working a suicide prevention task force within the system. But then as they generated new approaches and sorted through options, the system was not exactly sympathetic to institutionalizing new approaches.
She then took the intellectual capital generated through the working group and suggested setting up a non-profit group that could pursue a new peer-to-peer approach to working dysfunctionality generated by life experiences of the combat warriors.
This was the launch point for Warrior2Warrior. The focus of the foundation is upon peer-to-peer support in setting in motion a healing process. The peer-to-peer aspect is crucial for through shared experiences, the warriors can share their experiences and to sort through a more effective way ahead for the rest of their lives.
According to the Warrior2Warrior website:
We strive to honor the sacrifices our veterans have made by easing the burdens they carry.
FOR THOSE WHOSE LIVES HAVE BECOME HOLLOW IN THE WAKE OF WAR, WE WILL REBUILD; WE WILL REINFORCE; WE WILL BRING A ROBUST, HEALTHY, AND VIBRANT FUTURE WITHIN THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY.
The path to wellness is multi-faceted. The first step towards scalable resilience efforts is consolidation of services at a physical location — a Resilience Ranch — that will serve as a bastion of healing and a beacon for teammates in dire need.
The Resilience Ranch will resemble a forward operating base: simple dirt roads, trailers, fire pits, tents. This rustic austerity will evoke the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, and prime warriors to engage with the past in a safe environment.
At the Resilience Ranch, warriors will be fortified and lives restored. It will be forever a home to all teammates, and it is our hope that their feelings as they return will mirror those of alumni coming home to an alma mater.
The Resilience Ranch is the first phase of a plan for a larger, self-sustaining, veteran-centric community. Together with our fundraising partner, Vintage4Vets, we aim to create an economy around veteran support that will allow future generations of teammates to flourish.i
We asked how outsiders might help the Foundation and she noted that they were seeking to establish a permanent location so that they could hold what they refer to as the Resilience Ranch at a common location without having to pay fees on a per meeting experience basis.
By having a base location, they could hold their seminars and meetings and to shape a solid basis for shaping the way ahead as well.
One issue we discussed with her as well is the challenge for the warriors to get support for what is essential a malfunction generated by normal service, but is often looked at askance or as an aberration which leads to suspension of security clearances or as in her case, an unwillingness to get support from the TriCare system.
Susan Ullman: Some of the fear of marginalization is self-imposed, some of it is not though. It’s still human nature on a team, if you got a guy that your teammates, they know that someone’s not deployable right now because they’re working through some issues, by default they’re going to be viewed differently, they just are.
“Or, it’s, so coming forward still has implications. It’s a misnomer to say, “You’re not going to lose your clearance,” because you very well might temporarily lose your clearance if you come forward and say, “Hey, I’ve got a drug issue,” or, “I’ve been having really bad dreams and I’m afraid that I’m going to hurt somebody.” Or, when you say words like that, the system has to react as it’s set up right now, it has to react a certain way. Part of the end result of that is you very well may get sidelined.
“What the military’s been trying to say is, “But it’s not for forever, because you can go get help and then you’ll be welcomed back.” The problem is, guys don’t want to lose that period of. Maybe some of them need to frankly, I do believe some of them need to, are unwell enough that they would benefit from losing their clearance for a while and doing a deep dive into their mental health at a facility.
“There is certainly a slice of the population that needs that. A lot of guys don’t need that, they don’t need to go that far, but they’re concerned that if they come forward, of course they’re going to be put into that trajectory. They’re going to end up losing their clearance or losing the respect of their teammates. Again, that part of it is somewhat self-imposed, but some of it’s real. We are seeing more people. Trying to reach out for help, which is good, through the system. But there’s still a huge segment of that population that will never reach out for help. And that needs to change.”
Please see the following:
https://www.warrior2warrior.org/about-1
As the West Coast’s premiere training installation, Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton is a cornerstone for preparing numerous Department of Defense personnel to be ready to operate effectively.
MCB Camp Pendleton’s airspace and ranges are structured to ensure that personnel aboard the installation get the highest quality training while ensuring their safety and the safety of our neighboring communities.
CAMP PENDLETON, CA, UNITED STATES
08.02.2019
Video by Cpl. Dylan Chagnon
Marine Corps Installations West – Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
U.S. Air National Guard, U.S. Army Reserve, and U.S. Navy aviation units conduct flight line operations in a joint environment at the Combat Readiness Training Center, Michigan, from July 22 – Aug. 2, 2019, during exercise Northern Strike 19.
Northern Strike 19 is a National Guard Bureau-sponsored exercise uniting approximately 5,700 service members and more than 20 states and seven coalition countries at the Camp Grayling Joint Maneuver Training Center and the Alpena CRTC, both located in Northern Michigan.
Northern Strike 19 is a National Guard Bureau-sponsored exercise uniting service members from more than 20 states, multiple service branches and seven coalition countries during the last two weeks of July 2019 at the Camp Grayling Joint Maneuver Training Center and the Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center, both located in northern Michigan and operated by the Michigan National Guard.
The accredited Joint National Training Capability exercise demonstrates the Michigan National Guard’s ability to provide accessible, readiness-building opportunities for military units from all service branches to achieve and sustain proficiency in conducting mission command, air, sea and ground maneuver integration, together with the synchronization of fires in a joint, multinational, decisive action environment.
ALPENA, MI, UNITED STATES
07.23.2019
Video by Staff Sgt. Jacob Cessna
110th Wing
By Robbin Laird
Putin came to power at the end of the Yeltsin presidency when appointed Prime Minister by Yeltsin in 1999 after which he would become the second president of the new Russian state.
What Putin would create is the rebirth of the centralized Russian state or perhaps better put, the latest version of a powerful state in Russia.
As Putin underscored in his December 30, 1999, turn of the millennium speech:
It will not happen soon, if it ever happens at all, that Russia will become the second edition of, say, the US or Britain in which liberal values have deep historic traditions. Our state and its institutes and structures have always played an exceptionally important role in the life of the country and its people. For Russians a strong state is not an anomaly which should be got rid of. Quite the contrary, they see it as a source and guarantor of order and the initiator and main driving force of any change.
Modern Russian society does not identify a strong and effective state with a totalitarian state. We have come to value the benefits of democracy, a law-based state, and personal and political freedom. At the same time, people are alarmed by the obvious weakening of state power. The public looks forward to the restoration of the guiding and regulating role of the state to a degree which is necessary, proceeding from the traditions and present state of the country…..
We are at a stage where even the most correct economic and social policy starts misfiring while being realised due to the weakness of the state power, of the managerial bodies. A key to Russia’s recovery and growth is in the state-policy sphere today.
Russia needs a strong state power and must have it. I am not calling for totalitarianism. History proves all dictatorships, all authoritarian forms of government are transient. Only democratic systems are intransient. Whatever the shortcomings, mankind has not devised anything superior. A strong state power in Russia is a democratic, law-based, workable federative state.
A significant part of his state building effort was shaped by forging a narrative about Russia and its place in the world, which resonated with many Russians who suffered through the decade of the 1990s, and its chaos and wanted a more stable environment.
And Putin’s state would deliver both enhanced stability and an improved way of life than the one experienced during the Wild West period of the 1990s.
The Putin narrative has evolved over time, and he has leveraged global events to shape what he sees as Russia’s new destiny.
Over his time in power, the West has gone from being selectively attractive to becoming a force to interact with and to be reshaped as he is reshaping Russia itself.
He is not so much anti-Western as seeking ways to shape the West to become a more commodious partner in Russia’s return to the world stage.
Because he is judo master, not a chess master, he has played off of opportunities to work towards these objectives, rather than following some sort of master plan.
Putin’s clearly identified sense that the Russian state should speak for Russians is one of the most challenging parts of the Putin narrative.
He argued that the collapse of the Soviet Union meant that Russians were living in the Soviet Union one day and woke up the next living in another country.
As Kimberly Marten noted in an article published on March 19, 2014 with regard to this aspect of the evolving Putin narrative:
There are two ways to talk about a Russian person or thing in the Russian language. One way, “Rossisskii,” refers to Russian citizens and the Russian state. Someone who is ethnically Chechen, Tatar, or Ukrainian can be “Rossisskii” if they carry a Russian passport and live on Russian territory.
Up until now (i.e., prior to the seizure of Crimea) that is how Russian President Vladimir Putin has always referred to the Russian people….. That all changed on Tuesday. In his Kremlin speech to the two houses of the Russian parliament, Putin made a fateful choice. Instead of sticking to the word “Rossisskii,” he slipped into using “Russkii,” the way to refer in the Russian language to someone who is ethnically Russian. Putin said, “Crimea is primordial “Russkaya” land, and Sevastapol is a “Russkii” city.” He went on to say, “Kiev is the mother of “Russkie” cities,” in a reference to the ancient city of Kievan Rus’….
When speaking of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Putin added, “Millions of ‘Russkii’ went to sleep in one country and woke up in another, instantly finding themselves ethnic minorities in former Soviet republics, and the ‘Russkii’ people became one of the largest, if not the largest, divided nation in the world.”
Putin thereby signaled a crucial turning point in his regime. He is no longer simply a Russian statist, an old KGB man who wants to recapture Soviet glory…. Instead Putin has become a Russian ethnic nationalist.
Given the legacy of Hitler with regard to a similar perspecitve, which asserted that the Third Reich should speak for all Germans, it is not surprising that the new European states such as the Baltic states or Poland, would find such a statement very disturbing.
And when followed up by the actions in Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine, this perspective seems more than a bullet point in a briefing.
Clearly, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and the prospects for Ukraine to become a member of the European Union and even perhaps NATO was a flash point for Putin where the new narrative of the Russian nation was to be joined by the action of seizing the Crimea and “returning” it to Russia, or in this case, the new Russian republic.
Put in another way, the narrative about Russia and its legitimate rights to shape its own ethnic destiny and its role as a Euro-Asian power was backed by actions. And the seizure of Crimea, was very popular in Russia to say the least.
But what are the prospects for Russian going forward as this narrative is adapted or replaced by Putin’s successors?
Contained within Putinism are the seeds of its own destruction.
Although a nationalist, Putin is cautious.
But will his successor be as cautious is he, or will he shape a more directly aggressive approach to the West?
Alternatively, will his successor recognize the weaknesses of Russia and seek to seek to work with those states and societies in the West which would help Russia out of its economic dilemmas in return for well what exactly?
Could a successor emerge with a much bigger version of Russia and its future, and use adventures like Syria to shape European and GCC efforts to work together to reshape the Middle East, why the United States is embroiled in its cold Civil War?
Will the Russian relationship with China turn conflictual as the Chinese turn to dominating Siberia and the Far East?
Put in other terms, Putin has provided a transition from the turbulent, post-Cold years, which were considerably more democratic than now but also pushed many Russians into poverty.
Putin used the early 21t century and its rise in energy prices as a way to pay for the revival of Russia and in the throes of so doing built out his narrative. Putin is a geopolitical actor, in every sense of the word.
A key element of the narrative built by Putin has been to highlight great moments in Russian history around which authoritarian leaders have made Russia a powerful global actor and one to be respected. In this narrative build, nothing plays a greater role than remembering World War II or what the Russians call the Great Patriotic War. The way this has been done though is the problem or the challenge for Russia’s future.
There is no doubt that the citizens of the Soviet Union suffered mightily from World War II or fought heroically against the Nazis. That part Putin remembers and highlights.
But what gets lost is an equally important point – how the mistakes made by an authoritarian leader can lead to the destruction of his people.
In a perceptive analysis by Allen Lynch of the University of Virginia, the post-Putin future of Russia is the focus of attention.
The first snapshot looking forward in the final years of the Putin leadership would be continued economic deterioration of Russia while avoiding economic collapse.
The second snapshot would be to see the centralizing efforts of Putin backfiring. Because regional flexibility has been undercut by Putin’s system of vertical integration, explosions in the periphery could have a rapid Russian system wide impact.
The third snapshot would further economic deterioration spiraling into economic bankruptcy.
The fourth snapshot was be see the return of the Westernizers a constant force bubbling under the surface in late 19thCentury Russia, but remaining a force even in Putin’s Russia. And it should always be remembered that Putin’s kleptocaracy relies on the Western banking system and the rules’ based liberal order to protect their money abroad.
Lynch concludes that it is time to shape a Western perspective which understands that Russian authoritarianism of one form or another is most likely to stay and we need to sort out ways to cope with it as well as rethinking ways to shape Russian policies which are not going to be our own.
For example, the cost of holding the indefinite future of U.S.-Russia relations hostage to Crimea seems wildly excessive given the contingencies stretched out over time that could imperil both nations. Short of the headlong collapse of the Russian state—which would actually be a disaster for U.S. and global security—there is no plausible route to severing Crimea from Russia.
So why not consider a trade greased by the salve of a professional diplomacy: de facto U.S. acquiescence to the reintegration of Crimea into Russia in return for Russia’s leaving the rest of Ukraine alone, pending a suitable and achievable compromise over Ukraine’s geostrategic status and internal language and identity issues.
If Russian-Ukrainian relations remain a powder keg when Putin has left the scene, Americans may well come to regret that they passed on exploring an outcome that Putin could agree to.
Even if one disagrees with this specific policy issue, what Lynch has underscored is a key nature of dealing with the Russian challenge today.
How to deal with rise of 21st century authoritarianism in the context of Western disunity, which will not go away any time soon?
Can shaping states with clusters of defense or economic interests in the West giving real meaning to the European alliances, NATO and the EU, provide a better leverage point on the evolution of a Russia, whose regionalization might well be a better outcome for the West?
For articles we have published which highlight Russia under Putin, see the following:
PutinFor an e-book version of this report, see the following:
Britain’s second aircraft carrier, HMS Prince of Wails, has sailed from Rosyth Dockyard for the first time.
According to a story on the UK’s Ministry of Defence website published on September 19, 2019:
Eight years after her first steel was cut, the 65,000 tonne warship will head under the iconic Forth Bridges in the coming week to begin her initial sea trials.
Defence Minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan said:
“Prince of Wales’ departure from Rosyth is a landmark moment for the carrier programme. As the ship takes the next step to becoming fully operational, she carries with her the story of Britain’s maritime might.
“This tremendous achievement is a testament to the talent of British industry and I look forward to the moment we can welcome her into the Royal Navy family.
The carrier will conduct extensive sea trials off the coast of North East Scotland upon departing Rosyth before arriving at her home port of Portsmouth later this year.”
Upon her entry to Portsmouth, she will be officially commissioned into the Royal Navy by her Lady Sponsor, HRH The Duchess of Cornwall, and sit alongside her sister ship for the first time.
Prince of Wales’s Captain Darren Houston said:
“I am immensely proud of the professionalism and determination that my ship’s company have shown in preparing themselves and their ship for this historic day.
“Whether through working alongside our industrial partners to support the build and commissioning of key systems or training tirelessly to operate the ship and work as a team, the crew have demonstrated unfaltering dedication and resolve in the face of a multitude of challenges.”
The Prince of Wales is only the second ship in the world after HMS Queen Elizabeth to be built from the hull upwards, specifically to operate the fifth generation F35B Lightning II Joint Strike fighter jet.
Sir Simon Lister, Managing Director of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance said:
“The Aircraft Carrier Alliance has bought together the very best of British industry, and it is thanks to their hard work, skill and determination that we have reached this important stage in the programme.
“By working together as one team, we are now able, on schedule, to start testing this magnificent ship in preparation for handing her over to the Royal Navy.”
First Sea Lord, Admiral Tony Radakin said:
“This is much more than just the departure of the second ship in the class from Rosyth, but marks a sea change in Britain’s aircraft carrier capability. HMS Prince of Wales confirms Britain’s place as the leading European carrier strike nation within NATO.
“From high-end warfighting to humanitarian assistance, Britain remains ready to deliver on operations anywhere in the world.”
The ship has emerged from build two years after her sister ship, HMS Queen Elizabeth, which is currently transiting the Atlantic, including visiting Canada. The deployment, known as WESTLANT19 is an Operational Trial to be conducted with UK F-35Bs off the East Coast of the US.
The introduction of the new carrier flying F-35Bs opens the transformation aperture to provide a forcing function for RAF and Royal Navy integration. As Group Captain Ian Townsend, a key officer involved in working the F-35 introduction Ian Townsend into service for the RAF and now the RAF Marham Base Commander and currently the F-35 force commander, put it with regard to the Queen Elizabeth and F-35 transition put it in an interview with us:
As an airman, I like anything that enhances my ability to deliver air power, and the ship certainly does that. The ship has been tailor-made from first principles to deliver F-35 operational output. The ship is part of the F35 air system.
I think this is the key change to where we were in Joint Force Harrier where the ship was really just a delivery vehicle. The ship was just a runway.
The Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers are much more than that. They are right at the heart of the air system’s capability fundamentally enabling and supporting what the air vehicle is doing three, or four, or five hundred miles away from the ship. And that wasn’t quite the same in Joint Force Harrier with the Invincible Class CVS carriers. So it’s very different for us.
Everyone involved in embarked F-35 operations needs to understand what the air vehicle is going off to do because everybody on the ship is much closer to that end delivery of effect. This is a very different concept of operations from 15 years ago.
And in a 2018 interview with the then head of the F-35 force based at RAF Marham, Air Commodore David Bradshaw, now in a senior position at the Ministry of Defence, the integration piece for the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy enabled by working the carrier operational envelope was highlighted.
“We have designed the Lightning Force from the very beginning to be joint. My deputy is a Royal Naval officer. The entire Lightning Force is a mix of light and dark blue.”
The new Queen Elizabeth class carrier is the largest warship ever built in the United Kingdom. While most of the focus of the press coverage has been on the process of building the carrier and now its sea trials, the carrier is coming at a very interesting point in British history.
There is a clear need to shape a post-Brexit defense policy, and having a significant epicenter of national sovereignty able to operate throughout the region and beyond But it is also at the heart of integrating UK forces to deliver UK capabilities within the integrated battlespace, both in terms of an integrated carrier strike force as well as in terms of shaping the various war fighting systems which will come together onboard the ship.
It is however at the heart of shaping 21st century interoperability, notably in the Northern European defense effort. There is the interoperability being worked with the US Navy, as evidenced in the Saxon Warrior exercise off of Scotland.
There is the interoperability being worked, as the USMC will operate its F-35Bs off of the ship. This will require an ability for the ship to operate US weapons onboard as well as to accommodate USMC maintainers as well with their specific national maintenance approaches. The ship is an F-35 carrier and will work its interoperability with other F-35s as well in the region, notably with the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Danes, the Italians, the Israelis, the US and perhaps others Europeans as well.
In other words, the carrier is at the vortex of a turn in British history, and a key element of shaping 21st century force integration and interoperability. It is clear as well that the way the RAF is going about its transformation provides opportunities to shape new collaborative opportunities with European allies as well going forward.
Obviously, with the political changes underway in Europe and elsewhere, the UK is looking to shape partnerships, which protect its interests and provide strategic opportunities to shape its capabilities going forward.
And flying a force of F-35s and Typhoons provides them with an interesting opportunity to work with Europe going forward. As Air Commodore Bradshaw added during our 2018 interview: “With the F-35, we will have unique opportunities to work with our Northern European allies, including the Norwegian, Danish and Dutch Air Forces as well as out USAF neighbors at RAF Lakenheath. And with the Typhoon, we have good opportunities to work with the Germans, Spanish and Italians. And with the Italians flying a mixed force of F-35A, F-35B and Eurofighter, we have great opportunities to work together as well.”
Lulu Edwards, an engineer with the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center ‘s Geotechnical and Structures Lab, presents Rapid Large Crater Airfield Repair.
The Geotechnical and Structures Lab has refined tactics, techniques, and procedures to repair large areas of damaged airfields.
Runways can now be repaired and used within hours instead of weeks, even in remote areas.
VICKSBURG, MS, UNITED STATES
03.26.2019
Video by Robert DeDeaux and Dakota Pope
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center