Verified Attendee Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Afghanistan’ of Their Own Sgt
Vol. 13 No. 22 Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, Calif. June 3, 2011 U.S., U.K. helo forces collaborate in an ‘Afghanistan’ of their own Sgt. Marcy Sanchez exercise to simulate operations in environment pushes the Lynx COMBAT CORRESPONDENT WITH I MEF Afghanistan, May 25. helicopter to its limits giving The California desert condi- crew members experience prior NAVAL AIR FACILITY tions ensure any military unit to Afghanistan. EL CENTRO, Calif. - The sum- training in the dry, below sea Although simulating con- mer months of El Centro, Calif., level environment will get a taste ditions is imperative to the consist of no rain, scorching sun of what to expect in the Afghani- training, the two squadrons and temperatures reaching 120 stan desert. also focused on familiarization degrees and above - certainly a “Itʼs hot,” said Maj. Simon with one another for mission runner-up to the harsh environ- Gough, commanding officer of accomplishment. ment of Afghanistan. 661 Squadron. “We canʼt do this “This is a way to work togeth- Lance Cpl. Lisa M. Tourtelot Marine Light Attack Helicop- kind of high-temperature training er on procedures before we go to MARINE CORPS AIR STATION CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. - Maj. Gen. ter Squadron 369 and the United in Europe.” Afghanistan. There are ways that Thomas L. Conant, the commanding general of the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, Kingdomʼs 661 Squadron, 1st The U.K. squadron is also they employ their weapons sys- congratulates Staff Sgt. Bart Davis, a crew chief with Marine Light Attack Regiment, Army Air Corps, testing out the newly upgraded tems that weʼre not familiar with. -
Not for Publication Until Released by the House Subcommittee on Defense Committee on Appropriations
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNTIL RELEASED BY THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL LUKE M. McCOLLUM, U.S. NAVY CHIEF OF NAVY RESERVE BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL YEAR 2021 NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE March 3, 2020 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNTIL RELEASED BY THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 4 NAVY RESERVE FORCE ................................................................................................................................... 5 Commander, Navy Reserve Forces Command (CNRFC) ........................................................................... 5 Commander, Naval Air Forces Reserve (CNAFR) ...................................................................................... 5 Commander, Naval Information Force Reserve (CNIFR) .......................................................................... 6 Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) ........................................................................................ 7 PERSONNEL ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Civilian Skills .............................................................................................................................................. 7 -
Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress
Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress September 16, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL32665 Navy Force Structure and Shipbuilding Plans: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The current and planned size and composition of the Navy, the annual rate of Navy ship procurement, the prospective affordability of the Navy’s shipbuilding plans, and the capacity of the U.S. shipbuilding industry to execute the Navy’s shipbuilding plans have been oversight matters for the congressional defense committees for many years. In December 2016, the Navy released a force-structure goal that calls for achieving and maintaining a fleet of 355 ships of certain types and numbers. The 355-ship goal was made U.S. policy by Section 1025 of the FY2018 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 2810/P.L. 115- 91 of December 12, 2017). The Navy and the Department of Defense (DOD) have been working since 2019 to develop a successor for the 355-ship force-level goal. The new goal is expected to introduce a new, more distributed fleet architecture featuring a smaller proportion of larger ships, a larger proportion of smaller ships, and a new third tier of large unmanned vehicles (UVs). On June 17, 2021, the Navy released a long-range Navy shipbuilding document that presents the Biden Administration’s emerging successor to the 355-ship force-level goal. The document calls for a Navy with a more distributed fleet architecture, including 321 to 372 manned ships and 77 to 140 large UVs. A September 2021 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report estimates that the fleet envisioned in the document would cost an average of between $25.3 billion and $32.7 billion per year in constant FY2021 dollars to procure. -
Defense Primer: United States Transportation Command
Updated December 23, 2020 Defense Primer: United States Transportation Command United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM TRANSCOM operates in over 85% of the world’s or TRANSCOM) is a Department of Defense (DOD) countries. To accomplish its missions, the command uses functional combatant command responsible for providing military assets; it also relies heavily on its commercial- air, land, and sea transportation to meet national security sector partners. TRANSCOM’s commercial partnerships needs. TRANSCOM’s assigned mission is to “conduct are reflected in its large volume of contracting activities. globally integrated mobility operations, lead the broader See Table 1 for TRANSCOM’s contracting estimates for joint deployment and distribution enterprise, and provide FY2020. enabling capabilities to project and sustain the Joint Force.” It is the centerpiece of the Defense Transportation System, Table 1. Estimated FY2020 USTRANSCOM which comprises U.S. military, U.S. commercial, and Expenditures on Contracted Services foreign transportation resources. Division Programs FY2020 Established in 1987, TRANSCOM is located at Scott Air Force Base (AFB), IL. Historically, the command has Airlift Division 10 $2.3B provided strategic mobility in support of several major Sealift Services 6 $877M contingency operations from Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm to Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. It Specialized Transportation 15 $2.5B has supported peacekeeping initiatives such as Operations & Support Restore Hope (Somalia), Uphold Democracy (Haiti), and Information Technology & Support Hope (Rwanda). It has also aided humanitarian 60 $251M relief operations in response to natural disasters such as Related Services Hurricanes Dorian, Florence, and Michael. Source: USTRANSCOM. TRANSCOM has a workforce of over 116,000 personnel, Component Commands of which about 45% are in the Reserve Component. -
Department of Defense Ch. 2, App. G
Department of Defense Ch. 2, App. G TABLE 4ÐFUEL REGION LOCATIONS AND AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY a. DFR Northeast ........... Defense Fuel Region Northeast, Building 2404, McGuire AFB, NJ 08641±5000. Area of Responsi- Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New bility. Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia. b. DFR Central ............... Defense Fuel Region Central, 8900 S. Broadway, Building 2, St. Louis, MO 63125±1513. Area of Responsi- Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North bility. Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. c. DFR South .................. Defense Fuel Region South, Federal Office Building, 2320 La Branch, Room 1213, Houston, TX 77004±1091. Area of Responsi- Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Caribbean Area, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mexico, Mississippi, New bility. Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, West Indies, Central America, and South America. d. DFR West ................... Defense Fuel Region West, 3171 N. Gaffney Street, San Pedro, CA 90731±1099. Area of Responsi- California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. bility. e. DFR Alaska ................ Defense Fuel Region Alaska, Elmendorf AFB, Alaska 99506±5000. Area of Responsi- Alaska and Aleutians. bility. f. DFR Europe ................ Defense Fuel Region Europe, Building 2304, APO New York 09128±4105. Area of Responsi- Continental Europe, United Kingdom, Mediterranean Area, Turkey, and Africa (less Djibouti, Egypt, bility. Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia). g. DFR Mideast .............. Defense Fuels Region, Middle East, P.O. Box 386, Awali, Bahrain, APO New York 09526±2830. Area of Responsi- Afghanistan, Bahrain, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Oman, Pakistan, bility. Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. -
The US Navy in the World (1981-1990)
The U.S. Navy in the World (1981-1990): Context for U.S. Navy Capstone Strategies and Concepts Peter M. Swartz with Karin Duggan MISC D0026419.A1/Final December 2011 CNA is a not-for-profit organization whose professional staff of over 700 provides in-depth analysis and results-oriented solutions to help government leaders choose the best courses of action. Founded in 1942, CNA operates the Institute for Public Research and the Center for Naval Analyses, the federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. CNA Strategic Studies (CSS), created in 2000, conducts high-quality research on and analysis of issues of strategic, regional, and policy importance. CSS’ analyses are based on objective, rigorous examination and do not simply echo conventional wisdom. CSS provides analytic support to U.S. Government organizations and the governments of partner countries. CSS also maintains notable foundation- sponsored and self-initiated research programs. CSS includes a Strategic Initiatives Group, an International Affairs Group, and a Center for Stability and Development. The Strategic Initiatives Group (SIG) looks at issues of U.S. national security, and military strategy, policy and operations, with a particular focus on maritime and naval aspects. SIG employs experts in historical analyses, futures planning, and long-term trend analysis based on scenario planning, to help key decision makers plan for the future. SIG specialties also include issues related to regional and global proliferation, deterrence theory, threat mitigation, and strategic planning for combating threats from weapons of mass destruction. The Strategic Studies Division is led by Vice President and Director Dr. -
Running Toward Gunfire: Marines, British Forces Repel Insurgents Attacking Camp Bastion Story by Sgt
NEWS Running toward gunfire: Marines, British forces repel insurgents attacking Camp Bastion Story by Sgt. John Jackson CAMP BASTION, Afghanistan – Sergeant Rasheem Thomas never thought his first night working on Camp Bastion would turn into a gun battle with 15 insurgents. When Thomas was told he was transferring from 1st Platoon to 2nd Platoon, the landing support specialist with Combat Logistics Battalion 2, Combat Logistics Regiment 15, thought nothing of it. Instead of working on Camp Leatherneck, Thomas would be working at the rotary wing Arrival Departure Airfield Control Group on Camp Bastion, an adjoining base ran by British Armed Forces. He would be responsible for getting coalition forces and cargo on helicopters departing Camp Bastion’s airfield heading for remote forward operating bases throughout Regional Command Southwest’s area of operations. Thomas’ first night on Camp Bastion was Friday, Sept. 14. He and a fellow sergeant were driving through a checkpoint close to the airfield when they heard an explosion. (Read the STORY) Always remembered, never forgotten: Marines honor fallen brothers Story and photos by Cpl. Mark Garcia CAMP BASTION, Afghanistan – Hundreds of Marines gathered to honor the lives of two fallen comrades killed during the attack on Camp Bastion, Sept. 14. During the two separate memorial ceremonies, which were held Sept. 19 and 20, Marines paid tribute to Lt. Col. Christopher Raible and Sgt. Bradley Atwell. Both were killed in action while engaging the enemy. Raible was the commanding officer of Marine Attack Squadron 211, from Huntingdon, Pa., and Atwell was an aircraft electrical, instrument and flight control systems technician with Marine Aviation Logistics Squadron 16, from Kokomo, Ind. -
United States Marine Corps Unit Awards Manual
master-bac UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS UNIT AWARDS MANUAL UNIT TITLE GROUND COMMANDS 1st 4.5" Rocket Battalion 1st 4.5" Rocket Battery 1st 8" Howitzer Battery (SP) 1st 109th Antiaircraft Artillery Gun Battalion 1st 155mm Gun Battery 1st 155mm Howitzer Battalion 1st 175mm Gun Battery 1st Air Delivery Platoon 1st Air Naval Gunfire Liaison Company 1st Amphibian Tractor Battalion 1st Amphibian Truck Company 1st Armored Amphibian Battalion 1st Armored Amphibious Company 1st Armored Assault Battalion 1st Antitank Battalion 1st Assault Amphibian Battalion 1st Aviation Engineer Battalion 1st Beach and Port Operations Company 1st Bomb Disposal Company 1st Bridge Company 1st Combat Engineer Battalion 1st Combat Group 1st Combat Service Group 1st Combat Service Support Battalion 1st Counterintelligence Team 1st Defense Battalion 1st Dental Battalion 1st Dental Company 1st Engineer Battalion 1st Engineer Battalion, Division Special Troops 1st Explosive Ordnance Disposal Company 1st Field Artillery Group 1 st Fleet Anti-Terrorism Security Team Company 1st Force Reconnaissance Company 1st Force Service Regiment file:///S|/MM/MMMA/MMMA-1/Unit%20Awards%20NAVMC%20Update/master%203%20070927.backup.htm (1 of 205)10/9/2007 14:28:14 master-bac 1st Force Service Support Group 1st Forward Area Air Defense Battery 1st Fumigation and Bath Platoon 1st Hospital Company 1st Infantry Training Regiment 1st Intelligence Battalion 1st Intelligence Company 1st Interpreter Team 1st Interrogator-Translator Team 1st Joint Assault Signal Company 1st Landing Support Battalion 1st Light Antiaircraft Missile Battalion 1st Light Armored Infantry Battalion 1st Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion 1st Low Altitude Air Defense Battalion 1st Maintenance Battalion 1st Marine Brigade 1st Marine Division 1st Marine Engineer Group 1st Marine Expeditionary Brigade I Marine Expeditionary Force 1st Marine Raider Battalion, IMAC 1st Marine Regiment 1st Marine War Dog Platoon 1st Medical Battalion 1st Military Police Battalion. -
30 Nov Hires Report
Hire Heroes USA Confirmed Hires 2017 Through November 30 Service (Last) Branch Service Rank Other Hiring Company Name Position Hired For Army CW-2 Special Security Officer Navy CW-4 Black Knight Financial Services IT Production Manager Army CW-4 ASM Research Benefits Lead Army 0-1 General Dynamics Manufacturing Engineer Army 0-1 Scribe America Medical Scribe Gwinnett County Office of Strategy & Army 0-1 Performance Mgmt. Business Analyst Marines 0-1 Campus Hollywood Instructor- Theater History and Acting Air Force 0-1 Global Threat & Risk Analyst Navy 0-1 Advanced Systems Development Help Desk Specialist Army W-5 United Airlines Pilot Marines W-5 San Diego Passport Agency Passport Support Associate Army W-5 Selective Service System Program Analyst Marines W-5 Ulta Beauty Warehouse Manager Army W-5 DOD Pilot Military Program Analyst-Organization and Personnel Force Development Army W-5 US Army DOD Directorate Army W-5 NES Associates Technical Director Army W-5 Program Manager Army W-5 AFS Army Fleet Service Test Flight Pilot Army W-5 Investigator Navy W-5 R3 Strategic support Group Manager Army W-5 AFSC/Magellan Federal Training Center Manager Navy W-5 Naval Systems Incorporated Senior Logistics Analyst Army W-5 Aviation Specialties Unlimited Aviator Marines W-5 District Manager Army W-4 TFW - Tsay Ferguson-Williams Deputy Project Manager Army W-4 CACI International Lessons Learned Analyst Army W-4 Colorado Springs Police Department Criminal Investigator Army W-4 Intel Corporation D1D Manufacturing Technician Army W-4 Erickson Air Crane -
Marine Wing Support Squadron 272
LTCOL TERRENCE O’CONNELL SGTMAJ WILLIAM McCoy MARINE WING SUPPORT SQUADRON 272 Marine Wing Support Squadron 272 was activated on June 6, 1986 at Marine Corps Air Station New River, North Carolina. MWSS- 272 was organized from the assets of Marine Air Base Squadron 26, Marine Air Base Squadron 29 and Detachment “A”, Marine Wing Support Group 27, which were deactivated on 5 June 1986. Since 1992 MWSS-272 has provided essential engineer services to 2D Marine Aircraft Wing (MAW) by conducting horizontal and vertical construction, providing bulk fuel services, significant utility support, and Motor Heavy Equipment (MHE) support. The engi- neers of MWSS-272 also specialize in K-Span construction with the ABM and UBM, Rapid Runway Repair (RRR), soil stabilization/ dust abatement, Base Recovery After Attack (BRAAT), and Air Base Ground Defense (ABGD). In July 1993, MWSS-272, the Untouchables, spearheaded the total restoration of Landing Zone Bluebird by removing 166, 272 square feet of weathered matting, extensive earth work improvements, soil stabilization, and re-laying of 158, 976 square feet of matting. This project was completed ahead of schedule through exceptional efforts by Combat Engineers and Heavy Equipment operators. In September 1993, the squadron’s engineers extracted an AV-8 Harrier as part of an aircraft recovery mission aboard Camp Lejeune, NC. This fundamental mission is called upon MHE operators in OEF and OIF today. In 1999, MWSS-272 supported a New Horizons Humanitarian Civic Assistance (HCA) exercise in the Chaco region of southeastern Bolivia. MWSS-272 engineers were part of 240 U.S. military engineers who formed “Combined Task Force Chaco” to build schools, expanded a medical clinic, dig wells, improved roads, built a base camp in the town of Boyuibe. -
NAVY AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Cost-Effectiveness of Conventionally and Nuclear-Powered Carriers
United States General Accounting Office GAO Report to Congressional Requesters August 1998 NAVY AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Cost-Effectiveness of Conventionally and Nuclear-Powered Carriers GAO/NSIAD-98-1 United States General Accounting Office GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 National Security and International Affairs Division B-259298 August 27, 1998 The Honorable Ted Stevens Chairman The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Defense Committee on Appropriations United States Senate The Honorable C.W. Bill Young Chairman The Honorable John P. Murtha Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on National Security Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives The aircraft carrier forms the building block of the Navy’s forward deployed peacetime presence, crisis response, and war-fighting forces. The nuclear-powered carrier is the most expensive weapon system in the Nation’s arsenal and represents a significant portion of the Navy’s shipbuilding and conversion future years defense program. As requested, this report discusses the cost-effectiveness to the Navy of using conventionally and nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. As the Defense Department and the Navy assess design concepts for a new class of carriers, they will evaluate a number of factors, including different propulsion types. This report contains information and analysis that you may find useful in the process of allocating future defense resources. We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Defense, Navy, Energy, and State and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. Copies will also be made available to others on request. Please contact me on (202) 512-3504 if you or your staff have any questions concerning this report. -
LE II Student Textbook.Pdf
144279_LE_II_Student_Textbook_Cover.indd Letter V 8/6/19 5:30 AM LE-II TABLE OF CONTENTS Leadership Leadership Primary and Secondary Objectives ............................................................................................ 1 The 11 Leadership Principals ........................................................................................................................ 5 Authority, Responsibility, and Accountability ........................................................................................... 11 The Role of the NCO .................................................................................................................................. 15 The Role of an Officer ................................................................................................................................ 29 Motivational Principles and Techniques ..................................................................................................... 33 Maintaining High Morale ........................................................................................................................... 39 Marine Discipline ........................................................................................................................................ 43 Individual and Team Training..................................................................................................................... 47 Proficiency Defined ...................................................................................................................................