Archive through August 03, 2026
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Non-Game Discussions: Real-World Military:
Archive through August 03, 2026
Carl-Magnus? You are correct in your assessment of the Japanese, but please remember that they surrendered when the Emperor commanded it.
That does beg the question of whether there might ever be an Ayatollah who issues a Fatwah commanding surrender...
Vandar? I worked construction for years myself. Respectfully, there's no such thing as "ONLY" a Construction Worker. It's guys like you (and for a while, me, my ego says 
) who built/build the world we live in; you are as important for it as the people who put their butts on the line to protect us civvies...
... And FAR more important than the parasitic lawyers and professional politicians who do their best to suck the life out of it.
William
Yes, sanctions have an effect. Yes, they hurt the county's economy. However, the ones that suffer are not the leaders are rich of that country it is the common people who suffer. Their leaders then blame the US (those that impose the sanctions.) For why they have to live in poverty. The leaders take as much as they can to build their Military.
Just as I know the war on drugs will not stop the cartels and drug dealers from getting rich. Prohibition did not work. what famous Amercain family got rich from that illegal activity.
Jeff, I know my importance in the scheme of things. I wrote that as to say. I am not a collage grad who is so smart. Noy a professor of history are anything. Nut I do love reading about it and playing my games.
Sigh…
Those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past, are DOOMED to repeat those mistakes.
We do not have lawyers and (by implication) professional politicians just to suck life out everything and all.
We have them, to replace older law…
The law of the jungle (also known as survival of the fittest/strongest etc…)
If we had no rule of law, disputes would only be resolved by the strongest gang, army, bandit kingdom or whatever title they wish to be known.
You might prefer to handle your problems by force or violence, but part of being civilized means being able to find an equitable and (hopefully) just resolution without having to kill people who are of different opinions.
Is our system of government or justice perfect.
No, of course not.
Is it better than living some sort of dystopian hell?
Yes, in my opinion , it is.
People make jokes about lawyers, but even when things don’t seem to work out to satisfy all parties, it is better than the alternative.
MAJOR NEWS ON US-UKRAINE DRONES
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ek6knvZjPo
Geonews reports that the US just bought 2,000 F10 first person kamikaze drones from Ukraine, actual flying drones ready for immediate use by US troops. These things are quad-copters with a range of 30km and radio guidance (with serious jam resistance). The drones can carry small warheads up to 7kg, enough to destroy a truck or disable a tank.
This is part of a larger program by which the US will build a factory in Ohio to build Ukrainian drones of several types. The factory and the current 2000 drone delivery involve a Ukrainian company called F-drones.
That is itself part of a larger $1.1 billion program for the US to buy 200,000 drones from a dozen foreign and domestic manufacturers. This will include new Ukrainian interceptor drones.
It is specifically noted that Trump's attitude about Ukraine and swapping land-for-peace had been totally reversed at the Ankara NATO summit. It appears Trump is convinced Ukraine is going to win.
Ukraine is building up to produce 500,000 drones per month. Russia is pushing for 550,000 per month.
Seems odd that my off hand idea turns out to have been US policy that was in the works over the last three months. Did I have insider info?
Another day, another Wildberry distribution warehouse burns to the ground. 171,900 square meters, roughly 1. 75 million square feet. This is the fifth biggest Wildberry facility. This one is in some region called Vladimir. It employed virtually the entire population of a town called Khryslovo, east of Moscow. They are now unemployed with virtually no jobs to move into. The drones hit during daylight hours. As per standard tactics, several drones hit different parts of the building, so as to overwhelm the fire fighters.
Suchomimus, YouTube, 3 August
It is hard to get a grip on how important Wildberries is. Known as "the Russian version of Amazon" it controls 52% of Russia mail order and consumer trade. A bit of what it sells are direct military items and at least 1/5 of their sales are dual-use items that can be used by the military. Nobody in Russia has time to go on a camping trip for a vacation these days, but most of the "camping gear" used by the Russian Army was bought for individual soldiers by their families from Wildberries. This also includes body armor, uniforms, boots, web gear, and other things.
More importantly, the growing Russian entrepreneur class works entirely through Wildberries. Like Amazon, anyone can set up a "wildberries store" and sell retail any number of item, some bought elsewhere and some manufactured by those small companies. Those small companies keep 90% of their inventory at Wildberry warehouses, so when each warehouse burns, hundreds of small companies lose their entire inventory and go bankrupt.
Many Russian small businesses operate on a "just in time" system, meaning that they order small quantities of components and products every day or two from Wildberries. With a third of the distribution system destroyed, those companies are finding it difficult to keep their businesses open if they cannot buy the things they need.
Buying Ukrainian drones?
If true, then hooray. It's high time.
Yes, large Wildberries warehouses keep getting burned down, and Russian entrepeneurs are not happy, though they usually seem to be unable to name the true cause of their woes.
I always say that Construction workers are often smarter than you expect.
True story.
I'm the owners EHS (and owners controlled insurance) representative at the Mall of Georgia project. Multiple prime contractors. Hardin the biggest one. $1/3 of a billion in about 18 months. So I spend most of my time wandering about and gently pushing everyone to be safe.
So one day the chief "Tin Knocker" Sheet metal guy comes up to my office and says "Those stands on the roof for the Air Handling Units are not strong enough." I say thanks and ask the Architects to come with their Mechanical engineer.
Couple days later we are in the conference room, Contract Manager, QC guys, Superintendents, Mechanical Engineer, me & the sheet metal guy. Who, as tradition requires, has on Harley Davidson themed clothes. Boots, shirt & belt buckle.
sheet metal man & I relay his concerns.
Iranian Mechanical Engineer guy (ME hereafter) stands up, waves his arms and says "I am mechanical engineer and you are just a dirty worker." Sheet metal guy gets red in the face but says just "OK, you're the engineer."
meeting adjourns. I thank sheet metal guy for not beating the stuffing out of the ME. He just smiles and tells me "We are going to build those stands EXACTLY as shown on the prints."
Big day comes and all the AHU are being flown to the roof by Air Crane. $30,000 for the helo. The sheet metal guys are on site on Double Pay Overtime since this is a Sunday (so no one else is on site for the operation). All the AHU are flown and no one is injured (I win!). Helo and support crew all go away.
Sheet metal guy comes to my office and tell me, QC and the Contract manager that EVERY stand on the roof failed. Like he said it would. We say Ok and we'll get the Architect & ME back.
ME about has a stroke in the meeting. He screams at the sheet metal guy "why didn't you stop when the first one failed." Sheet metal guy says, "I'm just a dirty worker, not an engineer, it's not my place to second guess you, is it?"
Afterwards he says to me "just because I work with my hands doesn't mean I don't know my trade."
ME & architect take it in the shorts. Pay Sheet metal guys ANOTHER day of OT to fly all the units off the roof (and the $30k helo). Pay another ME to redesign the stands. sheet metal guys OT to demo the failed stands and build new designs. Pays for the air crane & sheet metal guys on OT to reinstall the AHU.
My boss guesstimated that the ME & his firm took over $300k in losses direct out of their pockets... Helos, OT for sheet metal guys, me, QC, outside ME comp[any, liquidated damages...
I tell the story about once tirading in author Eric Flint's presence on just how horribly bad engineering diagrams produced by "rocket scientists" are in my experience.
He told me that he'd once been a machinist at Lockheed, and been told by his supervisor "Flint! Stop bothering the engineers, just do what's on the drawing".
So the next day, his supervisor came in, and Eric is sitting at the multimillion dollar drill press machine, with a piece of metal over here, and drilling holes in the air over there. "Flint! What are you doing?"
"What's on the drawing sir."
Supervisor comes over, looks at the drawing, looks at marked radius of piece of metal, looks at marked distance from center of holes, says, "Flint! Go talk to the engineers."
Speaking as a purely white collar, never touches actual hardware except very rarely to look it over and sometimes make measurements, I am extremely impressed that machinists and other actual workmen can make parts that even fit together from the drawings I see, much less making rockets that usually do not explode on the pad.
What do those last two posts have to do with this topic?
Will, would you name the true cause of your woes if doing so mean taking a short flight from an 11th story window?
I am well aware of the issue. This is part of why a decisive victory over Putin is essential, and why ideas of allowing him to keep any of Ukraine are so stupid.
If Russians form a consensus that the war was an utter failure and a catastrophe for their country, chances for real change go up.
Procurement: American Drone Supply Network
August 3, 2026: America has caught up in drone design and production. With the assistance of Ukrainian drone warfare veterans, the American Department of War is also establishing drones for use in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. Until the Ukraine War began four years ago, Chinese drones dominated the worldwide market. The Ukraine War, now in its fifth year, has made Ukrainian-designed, developed, and manufactured drones among the most powerful weapons in modern warfare.
American drones emerged because locally supplied drone components were found in the homeland. These included airframes, electronics, mechanical components, batteries, communications, navigation, video cameras, and payloads of sensors or explosives.
For Americans, the Ukraine War demonstrated to the world how one could succeed or fail using drones. Ukrainian soldiers and civilians invented drone warfare and continue improving drone technology, tactics, and techniques. The NATO countries that have been supporting Ukraine since 2014 send military and civilian personnel to Ukraine or pay to have Ukrainian drone experts come to them. Some NATO countries had diplomatic or military personnel working with the Ukrainians to keep current with Ukrainian drone developments. For example, one of the more interesting developments was the use of AI in drone targeting systems. The AI drone contains a targeting system that finds targets. The AI drone operator confirms which targets are real, and once a target is confirmed, the AI targeting system needs no further communication with anyone. It is resistant to all forms of jamming.
Modern warfare has been radically changed by the introduction of FPV/First Person View drones. These drones are an omnipresent aerial threat to armored vehicles and infantry on foot. Each FPV drone costs less than a thousand dollars. Operators use the drone's video camera to see what is below and find targets. Armed FPV operators are several kilometers away when deciding when their FPV drones will drop explosives on an armored vehicle, which has thinner armor on top, or on infantry in the open or in trenches. To do so, the drone operators often operate in pairs, with one flying behind the other and concentrating on the big picture while seeking a likely target. When the reconnaissance drone finds such a target, the armed drone is directed to it. The two FPV drone operators are usually in the same room or bunker and can take control of new drones, which are lined up and brought outside for launch when needed. The reconnaissance drones are often unarmed, so they can spend more time in the air searching for a target.
The Ukrainians developed the FPV drone in 2022, when only a few FPV drone attacks were recorded. The Ukrainian Army was the first to appreciate the potential of FPV drones. By the summer of 2023, the Russian Army also began to use FPV drones in greater numbers. Since then, the number of FPV drone attacks has grown exponentially on both sides. Only 12% of those attacks resulted in the destruction of the target, which could be a vehicle, a group of infantry, or even a sniper firing through a window from inside a building. In this case, the armed FPV drone would fly through the window and explode in the room the sniper was in. The only defense from this was having a nearby open door the sniper could run to or dive through as the FPV drone approached. Sometimes that isn’t possible because the armed FPV drone is coming down from above the window and then in. You don’t see those coming until it’s too late.
Over seven million drones are being built this year. The total for 2024 was 1.5 million drones. There have been problems. Chinese component producers are having a hard time keeping up, and, last year, to assist the Russians, China halted sending drone components to Ukraine. Suppliers in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere were quickly found. Nearly all Ukrainian drones are built entirely in Ukraine, and the rest are assembled from imported parts or as complete assemblies. Some Ukrainian firms have improvised by using plywood and similar materials for their drones. For FPV (First Person View) drones, cheaper is better if the drone can hit its first and only target. Most Ukrainian drones are FPV models, which are considered a form of ammunition.
Both sides now use FPV drones, but there are substantial differences in how they are used in combat. The Ukrainians seek out high-value targets like armored vehicles, electronic warfare equipment, anti-aircraft systems, and storage sites for munitions or other supplies. Russian trucks carrying supplies are another prime target.
FYEO
Air Defense: Ukrainian Laser Air Defense
August 2, 2026: Ukraine is developing a laser weapon for destroying Russian Shaheeds and other attack drones. Ukraine has not revealed much about its new system, but it is known to be developing advanced versions of its Drone Dome. This system uses a high-powered laser that can destroy or disable most drones at distances of 2,000 meters or more. Drone Dome uses a radar system that can detect most small drones at ranges up to 30 kilometers and altitudes from 10 meters to 10,000 meters.
Drone Dome is not a radical development but part of a trend. Since 2010, Israeli firms have developed a growing number of AUD/Anti-Drone Defense systems largely because Israel is a nation that is most often threatened by hostile use of drones, also known as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, particularly small commercial ones increasingly used by Islamic terrorists and criminal gangs.
Iron Dome entered service in 2005 and continues to be the main defense against rocket and mortar attacks from Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. The manufacturer developed a version (Iron Beam) that used a laser, but because the laser was only effective out to about 2,000 meters, it was not useful against longer-range rockets and was actually more expensive than Iron Dome because the Tamir missile can knock down rockets fired from over 50 kilometers away and thus one Iron Dome battery can cover a much larger area than the Iron Beam system.
Since the beginning of the Ukraine War, Israel has been reluctant to supply Ukraine with weapons technology. The Israelis did not want to offend Russia. But now Russia is in terrible shape economically and losing its war with Ukraine. With not much of Russia left to offend, the Israelis could openly or covertly assist Ukraine in developing a more effective laser-based air defense system. Ukraine has already offered to sell Israeli drones and share drone technology with them.
FYEO
Support: Remote Control Vehicle Kit
August 2, 2026: The war in Ukraine spurred significant technological innovation in Ukraine and neighboring countries. Estonia is one such center of creativity, and a local firm, Telearmy, recently revealed its remote vehicle control technology. This tech was originally developed as part of a car-sharing system. Now this technology has evolved into a remote-control system for operating wheeled armored transports, Humvees, pickups, box trucks, and wheeled or tracked combat drones.
Another application is mobile decoys. Instead of stationary fake military equipment, remotely operated vehicles disguised as combat vehicles can be used as decoys to lure the enemy into attacking. When that happens, drones can be called in to target nearby drone operators.
Remote control vehicles are nothing new. During World War II, the Germans developed a wire-controlled vehicle that carried explosives. This was used to destroy enemy bunkers or tanks. Not many of these were used because they were difficult to control and not sturdy enough to last long in combat zones.
American soldiers in Afghanistan had access to Packbot and other small remotely controlled drones used to reveal and disable roadside bombs. Some soldiers purchased remotely controlled toy trucks that could be carried in backpacks and used to detonate tripwire explosives or, with some gravel or dirt added to weigh down the vehicle, to detonate some types of land mines. Affixing a GoPro camera turned the truck into a reconnaissance device in villages or caves. This approach was also used by rescuers searching for victims trapped under debris after an earthquake. In this case, there were military-grade surface drones that could go underground and see what was there and assist in rescuing people found down there.
Israel developed remotely controlled D9 bulldozers to enter defended villages and plow through walls or buildings so the following troops could kill any terrorists still present and collect information left behind. Israel developed several other remotely controlled vehicles for military, police, and counter-terrorism operations.
Several other nations, including Russia, China, and India, have developed remotely controlled vehicles and continue to develop new ones.
The Estonian remote-controlled vehicle has found new uses as more vehicles are deployed and more operators are trained. Disabled Ukrainian soldiers can use these from a base far from the combat zone to control supply-vehicle drones delivering supplies to the front, or reconnaissance vehicles that patrol remote portions of the 900-kilometer front line. Ukraine is also using armed drones to guard these remote areas, as well as taking part in assaults on Russian positions. A growing number of Russian soldiers are surrendering to the drones.
FYEO
Morale: Combat Cellphones
August 1, 2026: Cellphones are built for use in war zones, remote construction sites, or any similar situation. Military personnel depend on their cellphones as an emergency backup to their military comms, and to keep in touch with friends and family back home. Some of the current favorites are the OUKITEL G1 Rugged Smartphone at $164, the A3x + Reno 9 Pro Military-Grade Shock Resistance at $65, the FOSSIBOT F105 Rugged Smartphone at $161, the Ulefone Armor 21 at $314.32, and the OUKITEL G5 Rugged Android Smartphone at $132.
All of these use the Android OS and have sufficient RAM and storage for sustained operation. They have to be recharged regularly, but the American military has adapted to that, with most vehicles having charging ports and troops carrying extra batteries to keep their phones and other electronics going.
The military, especially the Americans, were early adopters of cellphones. They initially investigated the use of mobile communication about 40 years ago. The first militarized cellphones appeared in the mid-1980s. In the late 1990s, the military began modifying commercial cell phones to handle secure communications. The use of satellite phones became common in military operations during the 1990s.
South Korean electronics giant Samsung has long been a leading supplier of cell phone technology. For example, six years after releasing the Galaxy S9 Tactical Edition phone, Samsung followed up with the faster, larger Galaxy S20 Tactical. Samsung has been producing tactical ruggedized military versions of its phones since 2012. The S20 costs about 40 percent more than the S9 but offers longer battery life, a larger, sharper screen, more RAM and storage, and a faster processor. Many custom military Android apps are much more effective on the more powerful S20. Most military users are content with the S9, but the app developers often have some software that performs much better (or at all) with more speed and memory.
Since 2012, the American Army has been seeking out and purchasing cell phones rugged enough and with features suitable for military use in a combat zone. These CSP/Combat Smart Phones go by many other names, such as Tactical Edition, but all must be as flexible and up to date as their civilian counterparts. To that end, the Army sought CSP designs that are rugged and cheap, and that provide critical special features such as software-based encryption rather than custom hardware. Since smartphone hardware is rapidly evolving, CSPs should cost the Army less than $300 each and be built to be replaced every two years or less. This price is about what 2012 cell phones sold (wholesale, to dealers). There would be a similar, but slower, replacement schedule for the battlefield cell towers, routers, and other infrastructure. Not surprisingly, the army is allowing several different smartphones and supporting gear to be developed and tested. The military was spending more on CSPs because capabilities had been significantly enhanced. In 2012, Samsung's flagship phone was the S3. It was then the most popular cell phone, outselling the iPhone 5 and offering very competitive capabilities. For their militarized S3, Samsung added an additional layer of security they called Knox, and they made the Samsung CSPs the most popular.
Back in 2012, the Army noted that there was already a civilian market for a similar cell phone. This was the construction and remote facilities like oil fields, mines, lumbering market, plus the rather large number of people who hike, go camping, and climb mountains. There are over a dozen of these ruggedized cell phones out there, and that made it easy for the army to find the hardware. Your typical ruggedized cell phone is waterproof, shock-resistant from being dropped, easy to read in sunlight, and has long battery life. These models all use the Android OS/Operating System, the most widely used OS on the planet.
One problem the military has encountered is the cost of obtaining certain special hardware features. The most important of these is the ability to use mesh networks. This means CSPs automatically setting themselves up as nodes of a digital radio network. Mesh networks are discouraged for commercial cell phones because they offer no advantage to cell phone companies. But for the military, all their users are one customer who often operates in areas with no cell phone towers. Because of that, mesh makes a lot of sense. Fortunately, some commercial manufacturers began adding mesh capability to their Wi-Fi hardware, which is now standard on all phones. This came after noting that software that tweaked Wi-Fi to enable cell phones to form a mesh network was popular. So now the mesh networking hardware is available in many phones.
Testing ruggedized versions of commercial smartphones for combat use has been going on since 2009. There have also been efforts to establish standards that ensure these phones address crucial military needs. For example, in 2011, the NSA/National Security Agency created a version of the Android operating system for cell phones and tablets suitable for combat use. SE/Security Enhanced Android is based on a SELinux that the NSA began working on in the late 1990s. NSA has been active for decades in hardening PC operating systems. Since Android is based on Linux, NSA had a head start in creating SE Android.
SE Android was the last key element the American Army needed to move commercial smartphones and tablets onto the battlefield. The troops have been clamoring for a combat smartphone, and in 2011 the Army began field testing the Atrix smartphone and Galaxy tablet. Both were Android-based and designated as NWEUD/Net Warrior End-User Device by the military. The Army has since tested several more types of Android smartphone and tablet designs. Troops test this hardware in training, and SOCOM\Special Operations Command operators began using these phones in combat. SE Android provides the security against enemy eavesdropping, hacking, and so on that commercial cell phones and tablets cannot provide. SE Android worked pretty well, especially when worn on the forearm and usable with one hand.
The emergence of a large market for mass-produced, ruggedized, water- and drop-resistant consumer designs has generated significant interest among manufacturers in developing militarized models. Sales of several hundred thousand CSPs a year to one customer is an attractive piece of business. There is also the bonus of having an edge in the civilian market for “ruggedized” smartphones by being able to say that some of your ruggedized cell phone models were combat-proven.
Earlier attempts to create smartphone capabilities for combat troops produced a 2.3 kg wearable, networked computer with an eyepiece for the display and a handheld or arm-worn input device keyboard. This integrated radio, GPS, and 16 GB of storage for maps, pictures, or whatever. Troops found the system too heavy and not as easy to use as a smartphone or tablet. The Army found these custom systems far more expensive than a militarized smartphone. Soldiers and Marines knew that most smartphones could do the same job, and by 2010 the Army agreed, but it had to decide which commercial designs to use for combat testing. The older NWEUD prototypes underwent combat testing and failed. But the CSP prototypes received a much more enthusiastic response in troop tests.
Combat-experienced troops were eager to try this equipment out on the battlefield, especially if the new CSP systems were a bit more reliable than current radios. This reliability issue is something most civilians don’t appreciate. Since radios got their first wide-scale workout during the 1039-45 World War II, traditional radio equipment, despite decades of improvements, has always suffered from hardware reliability, atmospheric, and geographical problems. This rarely gets featured in movies, as it slows things down. But in the real world of combat, unreliable comms are a regular fact of life. Cell phone tech is not perfect, but it is a step up from traditional battlefield communications gear.
Over half a century of studies have discovered what an infantryman needs to be more effective. They need to know where they are, quickly. Having a poor idea of where you are has long been one of the main shortcomings of armored vehicles. Armored vehicle crews tend to be cut off from this while inside their vehicle, where they are even more easily disoriented. When the shooting starts, even the vehicle commander, instead of standing up with his head outside the turret, often ducks back inside to stay alive. Infantry aren't much better off. Although they can see their surroundings, they are often crouching behind something. When getting shot at, standing up to look around is not much of an option.
CSPs give Team Leaders and Squad Leaders, and eventually each infantryman, a smartphone and a touchscreen for the smartphone/tablet to control the thing. GPS puts the soldier's location on the map, and the soldier knows where he is. Earlier in Iraq, infantry officers and NCOs, equipped at first with map-based GPS receivers, then with smartphones, found the map/GPS combo a tremendous aid in getting around and getting the job done. CSP also provides a wireless networking capability, so troops not only saw where they were but could receive new maps and other information. Another goal is to use a vidcam to transmit images to headquarters, their immediate commander, or simply to the other men in their squad. Perhaps most importantly, the CSP gear provides the same capability as the 2003 Blue Force Tracker and shows Team Leaders and Squad Leaders where all the other men in their unit are. When fighting inside a building, this can be a lifesaver.
CSP-type capabilities were soon changing the way troops fight. Everyone can now move around more quickly, confidently, and effectively. This has already been demonstrated with the Stryker units equipped with CSP-type gear. Captured enemy gunmen often complained of how the Strykers came out of nowhere and skillfully maneuvered to surround and destroy their targets. This was often done at night, with no lights, using night vision. When you have infantry using CSPs to do the same thing on foot, you demoralize the enemy.
Troops in combat face unique challenges keeping smartphones operational. For one thing, there’s the problem of providing a reliable signal via the digital military radios. But that’s long been a problem with all forms of military wireless communications, and there are always new solutions that will work with a smartphone. Then there’s the need for encryption. Again, that’s another problem handled by SE Android. If the smartphone manufacturers and the NSA SE Android deliver, the troops will use it. They most certainly want it. Samsung took advantage of its market dominance to ship its CSPs with Knox, an additional layer of security approved by the NSA. There are CSPs from many other manufacturers, but Samsung hustled and maintained its market-share lead. Worldwide, Samsung has been overtaken by Chinese cell phone makers, who also make ruggedized editions. The Chinese CSPs are not really competitive with Western models, especially those from Samsung. Based on past experience, the Chinese CSPs will catch up and possibly surpass South Korean and other Western models.
FYEO
Surface Forces : Singaporean Composite Hulls
July 31, 2026: The Singapore Navy is now using composites for superstructures of its new MRCV\Multi-Role Combat Vessel warships. Composites, as opposed to metal, are lighter, less visible to radar, and have reduced lifetime expenses.
Over a thousand ships a day traverse this seaway. To help with that, last year a local Singapore shipyard launched Victory, the first of six locally built, 8,000-ton Victory-class MRCV. A second MRCV is under construction. Meanwhile, since earlier this year, components for their third and fourth ships are being manufactured and assembled. These ships are armed with 32 VLS/Vertical Launch System cells containing Aster and Mica VL surface-to-air missiles, a 76mm gun, and two remotely controlled 30mm autocannons. The helicopter deck and hangar contain a Seahawk manned helicopter and two smaller unmanned helicopter drones. Electronics include a sea/air search radar and a hull-mounted sonar. Anti-submarine weapons consist of lightweight torpedoes launched from the helicopter and/or from several of the VLS cells. MRCVs are designed to function as Motherships for a range of unmanned systems. With an operational range exceeding 12,000 kilometers and an endurance of over 21 days, the MRCVs enable the RSN (Republic of Singapore Navy to deploy several types of drones to protect Singapore’s SLOC/Sea Lines of Communications.
Surface, submerged, and aerial drones deployed from the MRCVs will work together to expand the ship's surveillance and operational reach across air, surface, and underwater domains. This enables one MRCV, with its fleet of unmanned technologies, to complete missions which would currently need multiple manned warships. Each 8,000 ton MRCV is 150 meters long and 21 meters wide. Top speed is more than 40 kilometers an hour. Range is more than 12,000 kilometers. Crew size is variable but never exceeds 100 personnel.
Singapore, an island city-state in Southeast Asia, is responsible for the security of the 223-kilometer-long, 19-kilometer-wide Singapore Strait, which connects the Strait of Malacca and the South China Sea. Singapore is a 736-square-kilometer island with a population of 6 million and a GDP of $565 billion. That comes out to about $94,000 per capita, the fourth highest in the world. The military consists of 51,000 active-duty personnel and 252,000 reservists. Israel helped Singapore establish its armed forces and supplied personnel to help train personnel. Israel continues to sell weapons to Singapore.
FYEO
Marines: USMC Uses Commercial Shipping
July 30, 2026: Last month in the Philippines, American Marines unloaded anti-ship and air defense systems from a commercial ship. This was part of a NMESIS/Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System test. The Marines are learning how to rapidly deploy these weapons, as well as radars and other electronic monitoring equipment, to islands in the South China Sea and the Philippines. If there were a war or crisis with China, effectively executing these maneuvers would go a long way toward deterring Chinese aggression. The American Army is also contributing with launchers carrying cruise and anti-aircraft missiles.
In the early stages of World War II in the Pacific, General Douglas MacArthur ordered the takeover of all available foreign commercial shipping in Allied-controlled territory. These ships were essential in the early stages of the war to move Allied troops within the Southwest Pacific Theater of operations.
The Marines have also established the Marine Littoral Regiment, which will be built around existing Marine Regiments. The 1st Marine Littoral Regiment is based in Hawaii, the 2nd Marine Littoral Regiment is based in North Carolina, and the 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment is based in Japan.
The littoral regiments make use of existing equipment to provide needed weapons, aircraft, and vehicles. One item, nine LSM\Landing Ship Mediums for each littoral regiment, does not exist yet. The Marines and the Navy are still working out the design of these new ships, which are larger and more capable versions of the World War II-era LSMs. They have not behaved themselves; one special item has to be obtained separately. The Marines want 45 LSMs for the three Littoral Regiments. This will provide nine LSMs per regiment, plus spares to replace LSMs that are out of service for maintenance or upgrades. The Navy and Marines are arguing over whether the LSM should be expensive at more than $300 million for each warship or cheaper, at about $100 million for each LSM transport. The Marines point out that neither the Navy's nor the Marine Corps' budget can afford the more expensive LSM version and note that the American Army already has eight 4,200-ton Besson-class logistics support vessels designed to do most of what the LSM is supposed to do. The Army logistics ships were built between 1987 and 2006. The Army ships have a crew of 31 and can travel 12,000 kilometers at 21 kilometers per hour, unrefueled and fully loaded. That can mean 82 standard shipping containers, fifteen M1 tanks, or anything in between. The Army ships have RO/RO (Roll On/Roll Off) capability for vehicles. The Army ships are similar in design to commercial transports used throughout the Pacific. The Marines are leasing two of these commercial ships to test their LSM concepts. The LSMs can be built quickly, and if the Navy and Marines agree on an LSM design soon, the new LSMs can begin arriving soon, with all 35 delivered by the early 2030s.
And then there is the problem that America lacks enough ships to support military operations in the Pacific. While the Marine Corps would be involved in the Pacific, most of the military manpower would be provided by the Army. A growing problem is the shrinking U.S. Army transport fleet. The Army has always had some ships of its own, for moving troops and equipment and for managing amphibious operations or major port operations overseas that need to happen very quickly. This is a tradition and a necessity that go back to the American Revolution. The Army is still seeking sufficient shipping to support a Pacific Ocean campaign. The Army was able to obtain only 8 6,000-ton LSV/Logistics Support Vessel units. The LSV is similar to the famous World War II-era LST/Landing Ship Tank. The LSVs are the largest transport ships the Army operates. The current Army naval force consists of over 130 vessels. These ships are mainly for port operations or landing craft. What is missing are freighters, tankers, and troop ships to get the Army and its supplies to the combat zone.
The American Army has always owned ships, usually tugs and coastal craft, to assist in moving supplies. During World War II, the American Army actually had more ships and more tonnage than the American Navy. By 2000, the Army had only about 295 ships. Nearly 20 years later, that number fell to 130. Back then, the decision was to buy more, mainly to speed up the deployment of units to overseas hot spots. During the 1991 Gulf War, it took the Army 150 days to move five divisions by sea to the Persian Gulf. It actually took 205 days to move all the combat and support units to the Gulf.
In 2000, the Army plan was to buy three LSVs. These are actually LSTs and can carry 24 M-1 tanks and deliver them right to a beach. At that time, the Army already had six LSVs. The Army also went on to buy high-speed, 80-kilometer-an-hour catamaran ferries that can move twenty tanks some 2,000 kilometers. The LSVs and 20 larger Roll-On/Roll-Off transports would be used to pre-position an armored brigade's worth of equipment off potential hot spots. Just add the troops, get the equipment ashore, and you're ready for war. All these Army ships were needed after September 11, 2001. With the terrorism threat, the Army has returned to obtaining shipping that can be quickly chartered. That worked after 2000 because the enemy was unable to threaten ships and charters, and their civilian crews were willing to do the work.
There is another potential complication. In the past, America has often been called on by its allies during military crises. The allies did not need much help with weapons or combat, but with logistics. America has been, for nearly a century, the world leader in moving military personnel and cargo to where it is needed and doing so under the most trying conditions of nature or enemy interference. Unless there is a major naval threat that requires a major military operation to protect shipping, America remains the most experienced at quickly organizing a major military logistics effort.
America spends nearly $2 billion a year to move military personnel and material. This does not include additional spending for war-related logistics. The level of activity and the length of time America has been at it make access to American logistics resources and specialists highly sought after by American allies. While the allies appreciate having American aircraft or ships move stuff for them, often it’s just the excellent and experienced advice from the Americans that is needed. What the army still needs are ships that can quickly and in large numbers land materiel somewhere without a major port nearby. That’s where LSVs, LCUs and LCMs are essential. These ships are essential for getting goods from ship to shore, no matter where the shore is, when port facilities are inadequate.
The most visible American military logistics organization is the USTRANSCOM/US Transportation Command or Transcom for short. The Air Force component is AMC/Air Mobility Command; the Navy contribution is MSC/Military Sealift Command. The Army contributes its expertise in handling the last mile, using ground and river/canal transport to get material from ships to the end user.
Since World War II, military logistics has evolved from a largely Army chore to one that depends much more on air freight. It was during World War II that America found it had the talent and capacity for truly massive, unprecedented logistical efforts on a global scale. Most of this was run by the Army, which had more ships under its control than the Navy. The Army ships and coastal craft were mostly for logistics, and that fleet of over 110,000 vessels contained very few warships. After World War II, the Navy got control of the Army fleet, and the Army Air Force became a separate service and developed a huge fleet of air freighters. The Army developed several generations of trucks and innovations like rapidly built temporary pipelines and a global network of transportation contractors.
These days, the largest component of Transcom is AMC. Most of the Transcom personnel are reservists or civilians, and much of the actual cargo movement is handled by aircraft, ships, and trucks hired for the occasion.
AMC and the Army move more tonnage, but if you want something moved anywhere very fast, which is common in wartime, AMC gets it done. AMC does this with a fleet of 1,100 aircraft. In 2011, when there were still many American troops in the Middle East and Afghanistan, AMC carried out 105,000 sorties, 20 percent of which were aerial refueling, the rest moving personnel and freight. MSC moved 502,000 measurement tons of cargo as well as 6.6 million tons of fuel.
The Army transport-type shipping is still needed as a reserve capability. Many of the Army ships are operated by reserve units, where part-time soldiers maintain skills needed in an emergency, when time is at a premium. That has been the Army's experience in every conflict America has been involved in for over a century.
FYEO
Air Weapons: Taiwan Drone Based Defenses
July 30, 2026: Recently, the Taiwanese government announced plans to spend $6.6 billion to purchase some 211,000 locally manufactured drones to prepare for a potential Chinese invasion. There are 208,200 attack drones, 1,446 reconnaissance drones, and 1,320 naval attack drones. Taiwan is in the process of procuring MQ-9 SeaGuardian and Alyius drones.
Taiwan has been threatened with a Chinese attack for over 70 years. Spending 3% of GDP on defense led the current American president to suggest 10%. The Americans depend on strong Taiwanese defenses because the U.S. is obliged by treaty to send military forces to augment Taiwanese efforts to block a Chinese attack.
Taiwan has been continually upgrading its defenses. Some of the more recent upgrades include SEAD/Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses capabilities. This includes purchasing the AGM-88E HARM High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile. Taiwan has also upgraded some of its F-16s to the latest F-16V variant, which includes the ability to use the AGM-88E. Taiwan also upgraded its F-16s to this F-16V Block 52 standard.
Taiwan has developed a new SEAD Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses loitering munition called Chien Hsiang/Rising Sword. This is a compact 1.2 x 2 meter propeller-driven drone weighing 6 kg. Cruise speed is 185 kilometers an hour, endurance is five hours, and max range is 900 kilometers. Its guidance system consists mostly of electronic sensors that detect signals from specific radars or other systems that continuously emit electronic signals. In addition, there is a video system that uses an image library to identify a specific system to attack. This is done by Chien Hsiang, which dives and hits the target at speeds of up to 600 kilometers an hour. This is sufficient to destroy or disable antennas or radars.
This drone is built for endurance and, apparently, moves most of the time slowly so it can stay in the air for up to 100 hours. The guidance system can be programmed to follow several strategies, and the difficulty of spotting the small drone makes it a threat to enemy ships or land-based radars. Chien Hsiang is launched from launch/storage containers mounted on a flatbed tractor-trailer truck, with the launcher boxes stacked four high. Chien Hsiang apparently launches from the box via a small rocket. Each stack of boxes can be raised at an angle so the drones can easily gain altitude.
The drones can be launched individually or in rapid succession to form a swarm. The guidance system handles swarm management and coordination. This enables multiple drones to search an area and, when a target is found, several or all members of the swarm will attack. While Chien Hsiang is relatively slow, it is small and emits little noise and no electronic signals. That makes it jamming-proof and difficult to spot and shoot. Chien Hsiang bears a resemblance to the earlier Israeli Harpy anti-radar drone. The Harpy was heavier at 136 kg, larger, and had a five-hour endurance. Taiwan believes that smaller with longer endurance is better.
Also purchased were 135 SLAM-ER Standoff Land Attack Missiles, eleven HIMARS High Mobility Artillery Rocket System rocket launcher vehicles, and six MS-110 reconnaissance pods.
The AGM-84K SLAM-ER entered service in 2000. It is a 675-kg cruise missile with a range of 270 kilometers, a speed of 855 kilometers per hour, and a GPS/shape-recognition guidance system that has proved very accurate. The target can be changed, or the mission aborted remotely by the pilot at any time. SLAM-ER costs nearly a million dollars each and has a 220-kg warhead based on the one used on the Tomahawk cruise missile. SLAM-ER is actually a scaled-up Harpoon anti-ship missile.
HIMARS rocket launcher vehicles fire GPS-guided rockets at targets nearly a hundred kilometers distant. Half of the new HIMARS order is for heavier trucks with added armor. These heavy trucks are typically used as wreckers to retrieve vehicles that get stuck. HIMARS can also fire larger, longer-range ATACMS rockets with a 300-kilometer range. Each of these takes up an entire pod, and each ATACMS carries 300 smaller bombs that can destroy armored vehicles or personnel. Also on order are 65 pods, each with six GMLRS rockets, and 90 pods with shorter-range, cheaper practice rockets. The order also includes spares, maintenance equipment, and technical support and training.
HIMARS is a cheaper, lighter version of the original MLRS/Multiple Launch Rocket System. HIMARS is a truck-mounted launcher, with each vehicle carrying only one six-rocket pod instead of two in the original MLRS. The 12-ton truck can fit into a C-130 transport, unlike the 22-ton tracked MLRS vehicle. The first of the initial 900 HIMARS vehicles were issued to American combat units in 2004. The U.S. Army is using most of the HIMARS, with the Marines getting the rest. A growing number of American allies have become export customers for HIMARS. The key to the combat success of HIMARS is its use of the 227mm diameter, 309 kg GMLRS/Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System GPS-guided rocket. GMLRS was first used in 2004. It currently has a range of 85 kilometers and the ability to land within meters of its intended target at any range.
Late last year, Taiwan successfully conducted sea trials for six SeaShark 680 naval drones. These drones, including, eventually, the larger SeaShark 800, carry payloads that include an autonomous guidance system, navigational sensors, explosives, and an AI-enhanced navigation and communications system that enables groups of SeaSharks to form and maintain a swarm despite enemy electronic jamming. Taiwan is buying 1,350 SeaSharks at a cost of $750,000 each. The larger SeaShark 800 will carry a ton of explosives.
FYEO
William: From your lips to God's ears. Regime change would solve so many problems, yet it seems the hardest, most chaotic, least predictable, and least controllable solution.
Yes. But the two semi-recent examples of regime change in Russian history both came in the wake of military failures.
1917, 1992.
Will: You prove my point.
1917 didn't produce anything good (what was there was better for everyone) and the baddies stole the government from the ones who might have actually improved things, hence, uncontrollable.
1992 produced in the end almost nothing as the old baddies are back in power, hence chaos.
Be careful what you wish for, you might get anything but I doubt you'll get a responsible democracy. We might hope for someone willing to end the war.
As a thought exercise, some ex-soldiers and I had a recent series of conversations along the lines of "someone kills Putin, the generals take power but leave that actor who impersonates Putin in place as a figurehead, and call in experts with the question: "How do we get a peace deal?" And consensus answer is you're not going to get anything but giving up all conquered lands and accepting the loss of frozen bank accounts because in a year Ukraine will get that anyway. Could any Russian leader accept that?I doubt it. Maybe the Russians could get an agreement for a totally cosmetic deal: "give the land back but an international commission ensures that Russian-speakers in the areas are treated fairly and 'Putin' retires."
Try telling anyone in Ukraine that 1992 didn't produce much
I was talking about inside Russia, since you wanted to discuss a new Russian government being more likely to make a deal. Thus your comment, however true, is not relevant to the question you asked.
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE UKRAINE WAR?
Possibility 1: Ukraine continues to hurt Russia and finally gets an "original borders including we get Crimea" deal.
Possibility 2: US/EU end support figuring the Ukrainians have this. Ukraine gets less of a deal than possibility 1 but a deal probably happens.
Possibility 3: Putin tries a nuclear warning shot. All bets are off.
Possibility 4 (perhaps the most likely): Putin declares total mobilization, expands the Army by hundreds of thousands of troops, and gives the old "Crush Ukraine" idea one more try.
Possibility 5: Putin dies, someone else takes over, anything could happen.
Possiblity 6: A Russian regiment is ordered to attack. The troops mutiny, refusing to fight, murder some of their officers. The division commander gets angry, orders mass arrests. The rest of the division mutinies and a strike by Russian artillery kills the division commander. Then the rest of the Russian army mutinies in a cascade from one end to the other. Things could get really crazy and the Russian Army could just surrender, or walk home without taking their heavy weapons.