The Secretary of Defense has proposed cutting $78 Billion out of the DoD budget over five years. That’s $78 Billion, or less than $20 Billion a year. Are you kidding me — why even bother with such a miniscule amount? Anyone with even a brief, passing knowledge of the DoD over the last 2 decades has to be amused that the national media has viewed this proposal as a “substantial cut.” With an enormous DoD budget that exceeds THREE ...
Continue Reading →Military News Highlights for November 10, 2010
235th Birthday of the United States Marine Corps!
To all the Devil Dogs out there today, congratulations on the 235th Birthday of the Marine Corps!
M4 Carbine and Accessories
If there was any question as to whether the M4 Carbine currently issued to Soldiers and Marines will be replaced for a more durable and lethal carbine or not, one only needs ...
Continue Reading →Medics Improvise to save lives on killing fields of Afghanistan
In a compelling story published today by the Washington Post, “Military medics combine ultramodern and time-honored methods to save lives on the battlefield” of Afghanistan.
Key Highlights:
- At 6:09 p.m., Dustoff 57 has just left this base deep in Taliban-infiltrated Kandahar province, headed for a POI, or point of injury. Somewhere ahead of the aircraft is a soldier who minutes earlier stepped on an improvised explosive device, the signature weapon of the wars in Iraq and ...
Goverment Approved Body Armor: Catch 22?
A week ago, SFTT received a request from a concerned parent (whose son is expected to deploy shortly to Afghanistan) inquiring whether a service member is obligated to wear “US government approved” equipment or is free to use protective gear and combat equipment purchased from other firms.
The question is in response to numerous reports from the field that suggest that “non-authorized” equipment may be confiscated and, in fact, life and heath insurance benefits may be forfeited if a service member is wounded or killed ...
Continue Reading →Body Armor Testing: What the GAO found
During Preliminary Design Model testing the Army took significant steps to run a controlled test and maintain consistency throughout the process, but the Army did not always follow established testing protocols and, as a result, did not achieve its intended test objective of determining as a basis for awarding contracts which designs met performance requirements.
In the most consequential of the Army’s deviations from testing protocols, the Army testers incorrectly measured the amount of force absorbed by the plate ...
Continue Reading →