OK - a quick one

Check out this entry from Steven Den Beste

The Bismarck and the Hood

Today marks the day that the Bismarck sank the Hood and 1416 of her sailors. 

This event, and the subsequent sinking of the Bismarck by the Prince of Wales (after the Bismarck was severely disabled by airplane-launched torpedoes), marks the beginning of the decline of the battleship.  From the launch of the Dreadnought until this point, the battleship was considered by most navies to be the ultimate weapon.  Enormous resources were poured into creating the biggest and most powerful ships on the seas.  The sinking of the Bismarck proved that the largest battleships could be defeated by much cheaper, and much more flexible, aircraft.  This was a signal event which sparked the creation of navies built around the aircraft carriers.

The other event, of course, that pushed this trend was the destruction of most of the US’s battleship fleet at Pearl Harbor.  Since all of the aircraft carriers were out of port, they were spared.  The US Navy was forced to rely on them while the battleships were repaired/rebuilt.  The Navy found that the carriers, and their planes, weren’t such a bad idea, after all.

Nanotechnology

MIT and the Army are working toward using nanotechnology for advanced battle armor. 

The MIT center focuses its research on materials and equipment to protect soldiers in the field or to provide them with medical assistance. The research falls into seven categories: energy-absorbing materials, which attenuate directed energy attacks; mechanically active materials such as artificial muscles; sensors that warn of chemical or biological intrusions; medical devices; manufacturing techniques for nanomaterials; nanomaterial integration; and modeling and simulation.

It seems a long way off, but very promising.

A quick thought

It has been a debate for over two millennia about which is the superior formation; the phalanx or the legion.  Although history frustrates us by not offering a battle in which both formations fought on equal terms with equal generals (the Second Punic War came closest), some generalizations can be made.  The phalanx is stronger in the frontal attack, but the legion is more flexible/adaptable.  Although this is an entertaining discussion to have, it is not the point of this post.

I was thinking about this in context to Rumsfeld’s new vision for the military.  He is pushing for a much more mobile and versatile force rather that will win battles without relying on overwhelming force.  Compare the Iraq war with the Gulf War.  Are we Americans just following the example of the Romans as we have in so many other arenas? 

Just a thought.  I may develop it later.  I may not.

Poland

This is a positive thing.  It illustrates the shift of Europe’s center of gravity to the East.

Disgraceful

This is a perfect example of the rot that sets in when military officers allow politics to be their be-all and end-all, and forget how to do their duty.   You can toss blame at the Clintonistas all you want, but as CYA politicians, their behavior is in line with expectations (not saying it’s not disgraceful, just expected).   The JCS should be ashamed.   There comes a point when you have to stand up and do the right thing, consequences aside.     If our forces in Iraq ever find Speicher/Speicher’s remains, some very large heads ought to roll.

21st Century Warfighting

This story from Wired made me laugh.  (Link via Defense Tech)   I had the “pleasure” of using an initial version of an Air Force computer system for managing administrative and personnel systems, and a test version of another system for handling communication and dissemination of battlefield information.  There are not enough curse words in the English language to convey they frustration of having a super-promising system which isn’t quite working as advertised, especially when your previous system was dropped offline in favor of the new one.

from blog to the WSJ

Good column by Steven Den Beste.  (thanks Instapundit).