The FReeper Foxhole's TreadHead Tuesday - AAAV - Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle-Aug. 30th, 2005

The New Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle Is it really a step in the right direction?
by LTC XXX USMC

Though largely eclipsed by the controversy surrounding the troubled V-22 Osprey, the latest Marine Corps amphibian tractor, the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV) has developed to a stage where it also presents some vexing questions about its future effectiveness. The AAAV will replace the current AAV-7 (formerly known as the Landing Vehicle Tracked or LVT-7) an aluminum-hulled vehicle adopted in 1972, shortly after the Marine Corps' withdrawal from Vietnam.

The new AAAV is supposed to do more than address the shortcomings of the AAV-7; it will also offer brand new capabilities. Improvements include a large increase in water speed for ship to shore movement, coupled with a sufficient increase in firepower and armor protection to enable it to operate on land as an infantry fighting vehicle (IFV). However, as details about the new AAAV emerge, it is becoming clear that these enhancements will be very costly and will require a sacrifice of some of the troop and cargo capacity that should have been the AAV's true raison d'être.

Thus, it may be wise to take a more critical look at the AAAV in terms of the Marine Corps' probable future missions, and determine if it really represents genuine progress.

Before beginning our discussion, however, we ought to be clear on a few key definitions: First, the existing AAV-7 is a lightly armored vehicle designed to carry a reinforced rifle squad. Once it swims ashore, the AAV-7 assumes the role of an armored personnel carrier (APC). In other words, it acts as a "battle taxi" with a strictly defensive armament (though this has recently been enhanced). The general tactical the idea behind the AAV-7 is to carry its troops to a debarkation point (screened from direct enemy fire and/or observation, if possible). At the debarkation point, the troops dismount and fight on foot. An APC is not designed to engage an enemy in direct combat, nor can its armor withstand hits by anything heavier than small arms fire or artillery fragmentation.

The AAAV, on the other hand, seeks to extend the conventional combination armored amphibian/APC concept of the AAV-7 to that of an armored amphibian/infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) concept.

This is a very big change.

The IFV concept as understood by the US military actually originated with the Soviet Army's BMP. The Soviets designed the BMP to support their theoretical strategy for fighting a ground war on a tactical nuclear battlefield. (Some might argue that the IFV lineage began with West German HS-30 and its replacement, the Marder While they predate the BMP and are considered to be IFVs, they were designed to meet very different doctrinal concepts.) The Soviet BMP was a special type of APC. It was designed to keep troops alive as they invaded Western Europe across terrain that had been bombarded by tactical nuclear weapons.

During the Second World War, the Soviets would typically begin one of their offensives with a massive conventional artillery bombardment. This bombardment would blow holes in the enemy's line, through which Soviet armor and its accompanying infantry would penetrate with the aim of exploiting their success through with an operational-level maneuver deep in the enemy's rear area.

Post World War II Soviet planners theorized that they could substitute tactical nuclear strikes for the artillery barrage in an offensive against NATO ground forces in Germany.

Fortunately, all nuclear warfighting remains an unproven theory. Soviet theoreticians recognized that their infantry would have to wear protective clothing to protect themselves from the radiation that would inevitably result from nuclear strikes. They also realized that this clothing would greatly reduce their effectiveness.

So, faced with this problem, they tried to figure out another way to skin the cat. The Soviets identified a requirement for a special vehicle to safely carry their infantry through nuclear contaminated zones. The BMP was the result. It "solved" the problem of contamination with an overpressure system that would expel radioactive contaminants from the interior of the vehicle as long as all the hatches remained closed.

The BMP also carried a heavy armament based on the theory that its heavy firepower could suppress surviving pockets of enemy resistance in the contaminated zone without having to dismount its own troops and thereby contaminating its own interior. Once a BMP passed through the contaminated zone, its troops could dismount and fight normally.

The BMP lacked heavy armor since few enemy heavy weapons would be likely to survive the nuclear strike. Lighter armor (though somewhat more than what an APC carries) would reduce the BMP's weight and cost and enhance its mobility, thus enabling it to be made amphibious, among other things.

Bear in mind, no one has ever fought on a nuclear battlefield and this is all theory. No one knows if the Soviet ideas would have worked as intended. Von Moltke the elder liked to point out that "no plan survives contact." The story of the BMP is no exception.

While the nuclear scenario never materialized, BMPs were nevertheless used in combat against enemies that had not been subjected to nuclear, biological, or chemical (NBC) attack, or even to massed artillery fire. Since they were not well armored, like the tanks they accompanied, BMPs predictably suffered severely from enemy direct fire weapons in both Second and Third Generation conflicts like the Arab-Israeli Wars, and in Fourth Generation conflicts, such as those in Chechnya and Afghanistan.

Ironically, the United States Army chose to build its own "answer" to the BMP "threat," largely because it did not like the idea of fielding armored troop carriers that lacked the armament of their Soviet counterparts. This "reasoning by mirror image," which had nothing to do with fighting on a nuclear or any other battlefield and everything to do with "one upmanship," eventually produced the M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV).

Though heavily armed as an antitank missile carrier and "BMP killer," the Bradley lacked the Nuclear-Biological-Chemical overpressure system that had been the real raison d'être of the BMP. Moreover, the unbalanced emphasis on making the Bradley a fighting vehicle led its designers to sacrifice about half its troop capacity to enhance its firepower. In effect, the designers degraded ability to perform its primary mission as an infantry carrier in favor of secondary missions better performed by tanks, antitank vehicles, and attack helicopters.

Notwithstanding the trade off in favor of firepower, the original M2 Bradley was no more survivable than either the early BMPs or the older APCs, like the M113. Though it actually had thicker armor than the M113, the ammunition it carried for its own weapons, especially the highly volatile antitank missiles and cannon shells, made it a rolling death trap. When Air Force Col James Burton's live fire testing program exposed the Bradley's extreme vulnerability to shaped charges fired from hand held rockets, such as the ubiquitous RPG-7, the Bradley's designers were forced to make corrective changes such as rearrangements of fuel and ammunition stowage, and the addition of appliqué armor.

To be sure, the "Burton Modifications" saved a good many lives in Desert Storm, but the fact remains that the Bradley is still highly vulnerable to direct fire and precision guided anti-armor weapons, not to mention mines. Like the BMP, the Bradley's weak armor makes it dangerous to employ its mostly direct fire weapons, at least without employing new tactics, which the Army has shown great reluctance to develop.

The AAAV, as currently conceived, will share similar weaknesses, though its vulnerability to secondary explosions will somewhat reduced because, as of now, it will not carry missiles internally. Its armament will consist of a 30mm cannon (firing the same ammunition as the GAU-8 "Gatling gun" used by the A-10 close support aircraft) and a co-axial machine gun. The 30mm round will provide greater "BMP killing" power than the Bradley's M242 25mm "chain gun." Nevertheless, one can argue that the AAV-7's "40-50" turret, with its 40mm MK-19 grenade launcher and its .50-caliber M2 machine gun would provide its Marines with better fire support after they dismount.

The Marine Corps has also specified a level of protection for the AAAV that may not be realistic for a vehicle that must also be able to float and move through the water at high speed. Basic protection on the hull side and front is supposed to stop 14.5mm armor piercing bullets at 300 meters' range or greater and 155mm fragmentation at 50 feet or better. The vehicle is supposed to provide "99%" protection to its crew and passengers from mines, though these mines are probably just the kind designed to immobilize a vehicle by breaking a track or a road-wheel.

It might be achievable to protect against 14.5mm armor piercing bullets with the frontal armor, but realistic live fire tests, patterned after the Burton tests, would be needed to confirm the level of side armor protection. In any case, whatever protection levels are actually achieved, the bulky and high-sided AAAV will be easy to see and shoot at Š and will provide little or no protection against any RPG, antitank missile, or tank that might be used against it.

Like the Bradley, the AAAV's additional armor and firepower will come at the expense of its primary mission: carrying troops and/or cargo.

The current AAV-7 can carry 10,000 pounds of cargo or up to 25 combat-equipped troops if a temporary centerline bench is erected in the troop compartment. The centerline bench is seldom used, however, so real troop seating capacity falls to about 17 to 20. Nevertheless, there is still much extra space for packs, weapons, ammunition, etc.

The AAAV can only carry about 5,000 pounds of cargo, and it is supposed to be able to carry a "landing party" of 17 - but it will be very crowded, with the senior landing party member seated in the forward compartment with his own hatch and observation cupola. The engine compartment is in the central section of the vehicle, between the senior party member and his troops in the back, but there is enough width for a narrow passageway on either side of the engine. Each of these passageways can theoretically accommodate three infantrymen on collapsible seats. The main troop and cargo compartment is in the rear, where up to 10 men can sit on two facing rows of five seats each. The troops riding in an AAAV (unlike those in an AAV-7) will have no extra space. In fact, they will not even be able to wear their packs and will need at least ten to fifteen minutes to stow them. Crew served weapons and their ammunition, radios, and/or other bulky items can be carried only if seating is reduced.

Under current Marine Corps doctrine, an AAV battalion is supposed to be able to lift the assault elements of an infantry regiment. Since it is unlikely that number of AAAV's in any future AAV battalion will probably not exceed the current number AAV-s, the restricted troop space in each AAAV will cause a sharp decline in the number of Marine infantry units that can be mechanized.

The cramped and convoluted troop accommodations in the AAAV will have at least two deleterious effects:

more AAAV's will be required to carry a given number of troops (and that could have a force structure impact),
ingress/egress times for the troops will be substantially increased. This could slow down the pace of ground operations and increase the vulnerability of debarking troops.

Testing at The Basic School and elsewhere has shown that it is possible to evacuate an AAV-7 in ten seconds but the same operation for an AAAV takes 20-25. This is especially unfortunate because the AAAV is designed to operate much closer to the enemy than the AAV-7. Slow debarkation rates can result in excessive casualties during an ambush, or if the vehicle is sinking, or on fire.

The one feature that really makes the AAAV unique, however, is its ability to travel in high water speed (HWS) mode. Most amphibious armored vehicles travel in the water in a "low water speed" (LWS) mode. In LWS the vehicle is mostly submerged and is propelled by its tracks (or water jets, as in the case of the AAV-7). Though it can survive surf and fairly rough water and can climb over a wide variety of obstacles, the AAV-7 in LWS mode can achieve no more than the five or six knot speeds reached by John Roebling's original "Alligator," which he demonstrated it to the Marine Corps in 1940.

The AAAV is designed to hydroplane at 20-25 knots in the HWS, though it can also swim in LWS mode, if conditions are unfavorable for HWS. The Marine Corps specification is that the AAAV be able to use HWS when mean wave heights are three feet or less, but that has not been fully demonstrated. In fact, as of last year, testing showed that even a less than fully loaded prototype could reach HWS only if mean wave height conditions were limited to one to two feet.

The announced purpose of this very expensive and technically risky capability is to enable the AAAV to support a new Navy-Marine Corps doctrine known as "Operational Maneuver From The Sea" (OMFTS).

[Spinney's Note: OMFTS is still a theoretical concept. It is way of thinking that links amphibious warfare to the ideas of maneuver warfare, particularly multiple thrust infiltration tactics. Fig 5 is a 3 page Adobe Acrobat file introducing OMFTS and its relation to the ideas of maneuver warfare. The idea of OMFTS itself is independent of technology, but obviously certain technologies might enhance its application, once we understand how it works. Therefore, although it is an exciting concept, OMFTS still needs to be tested and understood thoroughly using existing equipment, before it is adopted and used to shape technological developments. The amphibious triad is a purely technical solution that was defined during the Cold War before OFMTS was conceived. But many Marines now say the triad is necessary to implement OMFTS. This is a logical mistake, because they are not sure how OMFTS will work in the real world. The ideas of OMFTS can exploit many different technologies (in fact, the Germans tried an early version of these ideas underpinning OMFTS in the Baltic Sea during World War I). The bottom line is that OMFTS (if realistic testing shows it can be made to work) should shape technologies like the AAAV not vice versa. LTC XXX in the following paragraphs is alluding to the perverse effects of pre-conceived ideas about technology shaping doctrinal thinking, putting the cart before the horse, which is a process known in the Pentagon as Incestuous Amplification.]

OMFTS is really a marriage of the "vertical assault" doctrine developed by the Hogaboom Board in the late 1950s and the idea of multiple thrust penetration infiltration tactics in a ship to objective maneuver that bypasses (or reduces) the normal buildup on the beach. The Hogaboom Board called for the use of helicopters to land the first assault waves behind a landing beach so as to take the enemy's defenses from the rear and to allow the landing ships to remain out of sight and dispersed enough so as not to present a worthwhile target for a nuclear strike. Once the beaches were secure, supplies and reinforcements could come ashore in subsequent surface landings, which could be dispersed among several beach areas so that the amphibious task force could continue to minimize its target profile.

Techno-promoters of OMFTS take this technical solution even further, calling for longer ranged aircraft, fires from long ranged ship-borne missiles and artillery, and unconventional landing craft that could head for shore while the ships that launched were still "over the horizon" (OTH), or well out of sight of land. In an OTH surface landing, a formation of AAAV's could, at least in theory, be launched from as far as 50 miles offshore but, using HWS, could reach land within two or three hours and immediately start moving inland.

Of course this scenario puts heavy demands on the landing force, and it needs to be carefully tested under the most realistic free play conditions. In the case of the AAAV's technical influence on OMFTS, for example, it assumes the weather or sea conditions will not change enough to force a switch to LWS. It assumes the landing force can navigate over long distances with no mishaps, like going off course (even if GPS is infallible, people aren't) or having to switch to LWS. This techno-solution to OMFTS assumes that nothing will turn a two-hour trip into a 15 to 20-hour trip.

Within this context, it is well also to remember that amphibious armored vehicles are not boats. They are not designed to remain afloat for more than a few hours at a time. That is because it is usually impossible or impractical to make them truly watertight. All armored vehicles have suspension systems and other cracks and seams that will leak. Waves breaking over the hull will force water through even closed hatch covers. Such leakage is not a serious problem as long as there is a working bilge pump. However, bilge pumps need power and when an armored amphibian runs out of fuel not only does it stop moving it starts sinking. Thus, if an AAAV stays on the water for longer than its fuel reserves last, its crew and passengers will probably be reaching for their "Mae Wests."

Moreover, the cramped conditions and poor ventilation of the AAAV could easily make the troops seasick and vulnerable to disorientation. A flotilla of waterborne AAAV's could not carry any trucks, tanks, or artillery with it. If it carried enough ammunition, fuel, and water for even a very brief operation it would not have a lot of space available for troops. Indeed, in a true OTH landing (which would have to start at least 20 miles offshore) even if nothing went wrong the AAAV's would use up a third to a half of their internal fuel supply just getting to the beach. Though the AAAV's could deploy lots of BMP-killing 30mm guns, they would have no light mortars, howitzers, or grenade launchers for engaging enemy infantry in foxholes or buildings. Neither would they have any anti-tank weapons, except what their infantry brought with them.

Given the AAAV's high profile and light armor, an AAAV-based landing force would be very brittle in mounted combat but probably could not carry enough troops to be effective in dismounted action. Despite such problems, such a force might still be able to execute a raid (although the Marine Corps has executed very few raids in its history and most of those occurred in World War II), but it would lack the troop/cargo capacity needed to perform even a non-combatant evacuation operation (NEO).

The bottom line is that HWS may be technically exciting, but it is hard to imagine a lot of future combat situations in which it would be useful.

One could argue that air power can provide all the supporting firepower and observation capabilities the AAAV force would need. Airpower might also be able replenish its supplies and evacuate its casualties. Nevertheless, air power is highly weather and maintenance dependent. It is also subject to redeployment to other missions at a moment's notice. Furthermore, the effectiveness of airpower against tactical targets has been grossly overrated. Experience in Desert Storm and Kosovo showed decisively that fixed wing aviation's ability to effectively attack deployed enemy ground units is practically nil. Jet aircraft are mainly effective against fixed targets whose exact location is already known. Attack helicopters suffer from very limited ranges, short "loiter" times, and vulnerability to air defenses, especially shoulder-fired missiles.

Naturally, HWS can also serve merely as a means of getting AAAV's ashore without using other ship-to-shore vehicles. This is perfectly sensible but in most cases, LWS would probably work just as well. Eliminating HWS might permit the incorporation of other features that are more useful to troops entering a combat zone.

All in all, the AAAV reminds one of the old saw about the camel being "a horse designed by a committee." Its DNA goes back to the vulnerable BMP and the now irrelevant theory of the nuclear battlefield. It combines the flawed firepower/protection concept of the Bradley with the ungainly hippopotamus-like body of the AAV-7 that it hopes to transform into giving it the speed of a porpoise.

All in all, a more practical and conservative design, giving priority to the AAV's primary function as a tactical troop/cargo carrier, would serve our Marines much better.

Additional Sources:

www.panzerbaer.de
www.ndu.edu
web.nps.navy.mil
www.wd.com
www.fas.org
www.ballaerospace.com
military.china.com
www.efv.usmc.mil
www.generaldynamics.com

Explanatory Note to the AAAV Paper concerning the West German HS-30 and Marder Infantry Fighting Vehicles.

The West German HS-30 and Marder infantry fighting vehicles, both pre-date the BMP and are arguably the world's first IFV's. However, they were built for a different purpose and their designs reflected this.

Soviet BMP-1

The HS-30 was actually an improvised vehicle based on a hull originally designed as a self-propelled anti-aircraft gun. It had a relatively low silhouette and was well armored for an infantry carrier. It was armed with a 20mm gun and coaxial machine gun in a one-man turret. It could only carry a landing party of five or six who could only mount or dismount through roof hatches since the rear-mounted engine precluded a rear door.

German SPz HS-30

The Marder was Germany's first purpose post-World War II infantry carrier. It was designed to support Leopard I tank, and used a similar hull and suspension system, though its engine was located in the front, so troops could exit through the rear. Neither it nor the HS-30 was intended primarily for the nuclear battlefield.

The Marder's armament was the same as that of the HS-30 and its armor was nearly the same as that of the Leopard tanks (for many years the Marders were the most heavily armored troop carriers in the world), with which it was designed to work closely. The Leopards themselves were relatively lightly armored because the West Germans deliberately sacrificed armor for a high power-to-weight ratio. The West German fighting concept stressed mobility and would use their Marders and Leopards to attack the shoulders of Soviet penetrations of the NATO front line. Unlike American and British tanks, the Leopard I's were never meant to slug it out "toe to toe" with the enemy. Speed and surprise would be their protection.

German Marder

The original Marder's 20mm gun was not meant to be a BMP killer, though it could certainly serve in that role. Instead, it was a carry-over from tradition evolved during the latter part of World War II, where German Panzer Grenadiers made extensive use of 20mm guns as multi-purpose close support and anti-aircraft weapons.

US Marines AAAV

A number of armies have come to the realization that infantry carriers designed to accompany tanks must not only be able to traverse the same terrain as tanks but must also be able to survive the same threats. In other words, they need to be armored to about the same level as tanks. In recent years both the Israelis and the Russians have produced special heavy armored personnel carriers based on converted tank chassis. Like the HS-30 they are improvisations that do not carry many troops and whose entry/exit arrangements are complicated by their rear-mounted engines. Nevertheless such vehicles are necessary for infantry that actually accompany tanks. Fortunately, the infantry riding in them need only provide scouts and close-in security for the tanks. This can be accomplished with only two to three soldiers per tank. Most infantry will conduct mainly infantry missions in a combined-arms sense that do not require them to be in close physical proximity to the tanks. They can dismount further away from the enemy and in better-protected positions. Their troop carriers (and they will not always require them) need not be so heavily armored nor should they require heavy firepower either.

Showcasing America's finest, and those who betray them!

Please click on the banner above and check out this newly created (and still under construction) website created by FReeper Coop!

Veterans for Constitution Restoration is a non-profit, non-partisan educational and grassroots activist organization. The primary area of concern to all VetsCoR members is that our national and local educational systems fall short in teaching students and all American citizens the history and underlying principles on which our Constitutional republic-based system of self-government was founded. VetsCoR members are also very concerned that the Federal government long ago over-stepped its limited authority as clearly specified in the United States Constitution, as well as the Founding Fathers' supporting letters, essays, and other public documents.

Actively seeking volunteers to provide this valuable service to Veterans and their families.

We here at Blue Stars For A Safe Return are working hard to honor all of our military, past and present, and their families. Inlcuding the veterans, and POW/MIA's. I feel that not enough is done to recognize the past efforts of the veterans, and remember those who have never been found.

I realized that our Veterans have no "official" seal, so we created one as part of that recognition. To see what it looks like and the Star that we have dedicated to you, the Veteran, please check out our site.

Veterans Wall of Honor

Blue Stars for a Safe Return

UPDATED THROUGH APRIL 2004

The FReeper Foxhole. America's History. America's Soul

Click on Hagar for
"The FReeper Foxhole Compiled List of Daily Threads"

LINK TO FOXHOLE THREADS INDEXED by PAR35

"FALL IN" to the FReeper Foxhole!

It's TreadHead Tuesday!

Good Morning Everyone

If you would like added to our ping list let us know.

Free Republic Treadhead Ping

Freedom Poster;Delta 21;mostly cajun ;archy; Gringo1; Matthew James; Fred Mertz; Squantos; colorado tanker; The Shrew; SLB; Darksheare; BCR #226; IDontLikeToPayTaxes; Imacatfish; Tailback; DCBryan1; Eaker; Archangelsk; gatorbait; river rat; Lee'sGhost; Dionysius; BlueLancer; Frohickey; GregB; leadpenny; skepsel; Proud Legions; King Prout; Professional Engineer; alfa6; bluelancer; Cannoneer No.4; An Old Man; hookman; DMZFrank; in the Arena; Bethbg79; neverdem; NWU Army ROTC; ma bell; MoJo2001; The Sailor; dcwusmc; dts32041; spectr17; Rockpile; Theophilus;humblegunner

************Snippy, I bequeath to you the FR TH PL.

148 posted on 08/24/2004 11:39:45 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4 (I've lost turret power; I have my nods and my .50. Hooah. I will stay until relieved. White 2 out.)

Good morning, ON THE WAY!!!!. :-)

Good evening,
Is it Christmas already? LOL

Just got back from watching the Great Raid, two thumbs up!
I will read up in the morning. Good night.

Busy night boiloing water tonight. Regards alfa6 ;>}

Good stuff.

In the here-and-now, NOLA could sure use some AAV-7s. I wouldn't be surprised to see some end up there, along with other amphib assets.

Of most of this material I have no special knowledge. I have done a little work on some details in the past.

The specifications calls for a weight of 37 tons, twenty five miles per hour in a 2.5 to 3.0 sea state, and being in hydroplane mode when being only about 20 feet long at the waterline.

Seastate Tables, US Army

That is pretty rough weather for a twenty foot boat, much less a 37 ton armored vehicle. Making a guess, you are talking 5,000 horse power here. Likely more than that. The machine would be very dangerous, likely require advanced fly-by-wire computer controls to be stable enough to not crash in the water. The machine is simply too short and has the wrong shaped hull to do what is expected. You need a 120 foot long planing hull here. PT boats in seastate 3 could just make 25 miles an hour, and were 80 feet long and had 4,000 horse power. And boy, did they pound. No way you could sit down, break your spine.

Anyway, easier ways to do this. Essentially an armored vehicle for land combat cannot be made into a boat any more easily than a silk purse can be made from a sow's ear.

A wing in ground effect craft could carry an M1A1 and four properly made APCs. Just crash it on the beach, using retro rockets and a parachute to put it down intact. The machine could not take off, but so what. Leave it. A bumpy ride but way easier than a WWII glider. Can be done. The Spruce Goose was flown as a wing in ground effect craft. Others:

A properly made extreme short takeoff and land aircraft can land or take off in thirty yards. (Three leading edge flaps, four trailing, enough horsepower, Valin and Alfa6. Would remind one of a bird landing until the retros hit.) Could carry 2-3 tons, evacuate troops, wounded, bring ammunition, com gear, parts, etc. Could be such a thing has been built, but I don't know.

The best way to do an amphibious landing, I think, is to beach a full size ship, say 500 feet long, and just leave it there when you are done. Specialized design, naturally. Likely would be too damaged to salvage. However, it could land a hundred M1A1s, artillery, ammunition, the works. A huge one way landing craft which could make 25 knots at seastate 5, not a chicken 2.5. The crash onto the beach would be a lot smoother than you would think with a real ship handler as officer of the deck. Swabs would love the job.

The wing in ground effect machines I posted are designed for water landing and takeoff. I have a simpler machine in mind, one way only. Flip the wings down, lock with pins while boarding, hit the JATO. Use a pulse jet. The sound would peel paint. So what it gets crummy gas mileage. A neat gadget.

I forgot, got to get to bed, not 25 miles per hour but 300.

In the first image of wing-in-ground-effect machines making an amphibious landing the machines have absurdly impossible external shapes. Ridiculous. The other images either have been or can be done.

BTTT!!!!!!

Good morning, it's Tuesday, it's rained all night from Katrina here in Memphis, still raining and I'm off to quilting shortly.

August 30, 2005

Getting Personal

Read:
Matthew 1:18-25

The virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which is translated, "God with us." —Matthew 1:23

Bible In One Year: 1 Chronicles 27-29

cover You may have received a letter recently and stared in surprise at the stamp. Instead of seeing the face of a famous person or historical figure, it was your brother and his dog.

In a test case, the US Postal Service licensed a private company to sell official stamps. For twice the value of the postage, customers could upload a digital photo of their choosing to a Web site, and in about a week they could stick first-class pictures of their wedding on their thank-you notes. Many people hope that technology will revive the lost art of sending a personal message by mail.

It's good to recall that the birth of Jesus was the most personal message possible from God. An angel told Joseph that this miracle baby would be a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy: "'Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,' which is translated, 'God with us'" (Matthew 1:23).

Paul confirmed Jesus' identity when he wrote: "[Jesus] is the image of the invisible God," and that all of God's fullness dwells in Him (Colossians 1:15,19).

God Himself came to earth in the person of Jesus Christ to save us from our sins. Could it be any more personal than that? —David McCasland

Once from the realms of infinite glory,
Down to the depths of our ruin and loss,
Jesus came, seeking—O Love's sweet story—
Came to the manger, the shame, and the cross. —Strickland

God reached out to mankind with the arms of Jesus.

FOR FURTHER STUDY
Who Is This Man Who Says He's God?
The Passion Of Christ

Good morning everyone.

Good morning ladies. Flag-o-Crawford-o-Gram.

Is that a quilt?

On This Day In History

Birthdates which occurred on August 30:
1334 Pedro, the Cruel, King of Castilia & Leon
1748 Jacques-Louis David France, Neoclassical painter (Death of Marat)
1797 Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley London England, author (Frankenstein)
1871 Ernest Lord Rutherford England, physicist; discovered and named alpha, beta and gamma radiation
1884 Theodor Svedberg Sweden, chemist, worked with colloids (Nobel '26)
1893 Huey P Long Winn Parish La, (gov/sen-D-La)
1896 Raymond Massey Toronto Canada, actor (Dr Gillespie-Dr Kildare)
1901 John Gunther Chicago Ill, author/host (John Gunther's High Road)
1901 John C Stennis (Sen-D-MS, 1947-88)
1901 Roy Wilkins civil rights director (NAACP)
1907 Fred MacMurray Kankakee Ill, actor (Caine Mutiny, My 3 Sons)
1909 Joan Blondell NYC, actress (Real McCoys, Here Come the Brides)
1918 Ted Williams Baseball's last .400 hitter (Boston Red Sox, hit .406, .344 lifetime)
1919 Kitty Wells Nashville Tn, country singer (Grand Ole Opry)
1927 Geoffrey Beene Louisiana, dress designer (8 Coty Awards)
1928 Bill Daily Des Moines Iowa, actor (I Dream of Jeannie, Newhart)
1930 Warren Buffett author (The Midas Touch)
1931 John L Swigert Jr Denver Colorado, astronaut (Apollo 13
1935 John Phillips singer/songwriter (Mama & Papas-California Dreaming)
1943 Jean Claude Killy France, skier (Olympic-3 golds-1968)
1943 R (Robert) Crumb cartoonist (Fritz the Cat, Mr. Natural, Zap Comics)
1947 Peggy Lipton Lawrence NY, actress (Julie-Mod Squad, Twin Peaks)
1950 John Landis actor (American Werewolf in London)

Deaths which occurred on August 30:
0030 BC Cleopatra 7th & most famous queen of Egypt, commits suicide (really made an asp of herself)
0526 Theodorik the Great, King of Ostrogoths, conqueror of Roman Empire/King of Italy,
1483 Louis XI king of France (1461-83), dies at 60
1809 Ignacy Potocki Polish Foreign Minister (constitution), dies
1879 John B Hood confederate general (lost Atlanta), dies at 48
1914 Aleksandr Samsonov Russian general, commits suicide
1930 William H Taft 27th US President, dies
1961 Charles Coburn Acad award winning actor, dies at 84
1963 Axel Stordahl orch leader (Frank Sinatra Show), dies at 50
1968 William Talman actor (Hamilton-Perry Mason), dies at 53
1970 Del Moore actor/announcer (Cal-Bachelor Father), dies at 53
1981 Mohammad Ali Rajai president of Iran, assassinated by a bomb
1981 Mohammad Javad Bahonar prime minister of Iran, assassinated by a bomb
1993 Richard Jordan, US actor (The Friends of Eddie Coyle, Logan's Run, Hunt for Red October), dies at 55, shortly after finishing movie, Gettysburg (Gen. Armistead)

Take A Moment To Remember
GWOT Casualties

Iraq
30-Aug-2003 1 | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
US Sergeant Sean K. Cataudella Tikrit (near) - Salah ad Din Non-hostile - drowning

30-Aug-2004 1 | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
US Staff Sergeant Aaron N. Holleyman Khutaylah (nr. Syrian border) - Anbar Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack

Afghanistan
A GOOD DAY

http://icasualties.org/oif/
Data research by Pat Kneisler
Designed and maintained by Michael White
//////////
Go here and I'll stop nagging.
http://soldiersangels.org/heroes/index.php

On this day...
0031 BC Origin of Era of Augustus
0257 St Sixtus II begins his reign as Catholic Pope
1146 European leaders outlaw crossbow, intending to end war for all time(Well THAT worked real good)
1464 Pietro Barbo elected to succeed Pope Pius II (Paul II)
1645 Dutch & Indians sign peace treaty
1721 The Peace of Nystad ends the Second Northern War between Sweden and Russia, giving Russia considerably more power in the Baltic region.
1776 US army evacuates Long Island/falls back to Manhattan, NYC
1780 General Benedict Arnold betrayed the US when he promised secretly to surrender the fort at West Point to the British army. Arnold - whose name has become synonymous with traitor - fled to England after the botched consipracy. His co-conspirator, British spy Major John Andre, was hanged by Gen. Washington
1781 French fleet of 24 ships under Comte de Grasse defeat British under Admiral Graves at battle of Chesapeake Capes in Revolutionary War
1813 Creek Indians massacred over 500 people at Fort Mims Alabama
1843 1st black participation in natl political convention (Liberty Party)
1850 Honolulu, Hawaii becomes a city
1861 Union General John Fremont declares martial law throughout Missouri and makes his own emancipation proclamation to free slaves in the state. President Lincoln overrules the general.
1862 Battle of 2nd Manassas-Pope defeated by Lee
1862 Battle of Altamont-Confederates beat Union forces in Tennessee
1885 13,000 meteors seen in 1 hour near Andromeda
1888 Lord Walsingham kills 1070 grouse in a single day
1905 Ty Cobb's 1st major league at bat (Detroit Tigers)
1913 Phillies lead Giants 8-6 in top of 9th, fans in bleachers try to distract Giants, Umpire forefeits game to Giants, later overruled
1914 1st German plane bombs above Paris, 2 killed
1914 Battle at Tannenberg ends in destruction of Russian 2nd Narev army
1918 Czechoslovakia forms independence republic
1932 World War I fighter ace, Hermann Goring elected president of Reichstag
1933 Portuguese dictator Salazar forms secret police (PIDE)
1939 Isoroku Yamamoto appointed supreme commander of Japanese fleet
1939 NY Yankee Atley Donald pitches a baseball a record 94.7 mph
1941 German forces began the 900-day siege of Leningrad. When the siege ends, the Russian city lay in ruins and hundreds of thousands of people had died. And Leningrad still belonged to the Russians.
1941 St Louis Card Lon Warneke no-hits Cin Reds, 2-0
1944 Soviet troops enter Bucharest Romania
1945 Hong Kong liberated from Japan
1956 White mob prevents enrollment of blacks at Mansfield HS, Texas
1957 In an effort to stall the Civil Rights Act of 1957 from passing, Senator Strom Thurmond (D-S.C.) filibusters for over 24 hours. The bill passed, but Thurmond's filibuster becomes the longest in Senate history.
1961 1st Negro judge of a US District Court confirmed-JB Parsons
1963 Hot Line communications link between Wash DC & Moscow begins
1965 Casey Stengel announces his retirement after 55 years in baseball
1965 Section of Allalin glacier wipes out construction site at Mattmark Dam near Saas-Fee, Switzerland
1967 US Senate confirm Thurgood Marshall as 1st black justice
1968 1st record under Apple label (Beatle's Hey Jude)
1969 120,000 attend Texas Intl Pop Festival
1969 25,000 attend 2nd Annual Sky River Rock Festival, Tenino Wash
1974 Express train runs full speed into Zagreb, Yugo rail yard killing 153
1976 Tom Brokaw becomes news anchor of the Today Show
1979 1st recorded occurrence-comet hits sun (energy=1 mil hydrogen bombs)

1979 Pres Carter attacked by a rabbit on a canoe trip in Plains Ga. (In Carters defence it was a big rabbit...a really really big rabbit...the kind of rabbit that is known to lay waste to small-medium sized cities without breaking a sweat. Don't let those floppy ears and cute fuzzy tail fool you, the rabbit is a KILLER.)

1979 Hurricane David devastates the Caribbean island of Dominica 1,100 die
1983 8th Space Shuttle Mission-Challenger 3-launched (6 days)
1984 12th Space Shuttle Mission (41-D)-Discovery 1-launched (6 days)
1986 Soviet authorities arrested Nicholas Daniloff (US News World Report)
1987 Ben Johnson of Canada runs 100 m in world record 9.83 sec
1987 Yves Pol of France runs complete marathon backwards (3:57:57)
1990 President Bush told a news conference that a “new world order” could emerge from the Gulf crisis (sales of aluminum foil skyrocket)
1991 Dan O'Brien sets US decathalon record with 8,812 points
1995 Cable News Network joins internet
1996 The US State Dept. sends a diplomatic note to China protesting the sale of equipment for use in nuclear facilities in Pakistan
1996 Louis Farrakhan says that he could not accept a Libyan $250,000 bribe...(I mean) human rights award until US courts give him permission.
2001 East Timor holds elections for an 88-member assembly to write a constitution
2002 North Korea makes changes in its economic system that included a phase out of its public distribution system, price increases and salary increases (And now back to the real world)
2003 Harley-Davidson celebrated its 100th anniversary in Milwaukee with a parade of 10,000 motorcycles
2004 Republicans opened their convention in NYC with speeches by Rudolph Giuliani and Sen. John McCain.

Holidays
Note: Some Holidays are only applicable on a given "day of the week"

Afghanistan : Children's Day
England, Channel Is, Northern Ireland, Wales : Bank Holiday (Monday)
Gibraltar : Bank Holiday
Turkey : Victory Day (1922)
National Neighborhood Day
National Toasted Marshmallow Day
National Sandwich Month

Religious Observances
RC : Comm of St Fiacre, Irish hermit, patron of gardeners
Old RC : Feast of St Rose of Lima, patron of Latin America
RC Felix & Adauctus, Roman martyrs
RC Pammachius, Roman senator

Religious History
1637 Colonial religious teacher Anne Hutchinson, 46, was charged with "traducing (i.e., degrading) the ministry" and was banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Moving the following year to Rhode Island, then to New York, Anne and her family were killed by Indians in 1643.
1770 Anglican clergyman and hymnwriter John Newton wrote in a letter: 'The exercised and experienced Christian, by the knowledge he has gained of his own heart and the many difficulties he has had to struggle with, acquires a skill and compassion in dealing with others.
1820 Birth of George F. Root, American sacred music editor and composer. Root helped edit 75 musical collections, as well as composing several hundred original sacred melodies. One of these, JEWELS, is the tune to which is commonly sung the hymn, "When He Cometh."
1856 Wilberforce University was established in Xenia, Ohio under auspices of the Methodist Episcopal Church. In 1863, the university was transferred to the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church.
1894 Independent Christian evangelist and educator Bob Jones, Sr. was converted at age 11 to a vital Christian faith. Licensed to preach by the Methodists at 15, Jones maintained a lifelong fundamentalist view of the Bible. In 1926, at age 32, he founded Bob Jones University.

Source: William D. Blake. ALMANAC OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1987.

Starving won't make people live longer

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Starving -- officially known as caloric restriction -- may make worms and mice live up to 50 percent longer but it will not help humans live super-long lives, two biologists argued on Sunday.
They said their mathematical model showed that a lifetime of low-calorie dieting would only extend human life span by about 7 percent, unlike smaller animals, whose life spans are affected more by the effects of starvation.
This is because restricting calories only indirectly affects life span, said John Phelan of the University of California Lo Angeles and Michael Rose of the University of California Irvine.

Researchers at various universities and the national Institutes of Health are testing the theories but there are groups already cutting calories by up to a third in the hope they can live to be 120 or 125, while staying healthy.
"Our message is that suffering years of misery to remain super-skinny is not going to have a big payoff in terms of a longer life," said Phelan, an evolutionary biologist, in a statement.
The idea of caloric restriction has been gaining credence as scientists test it in more and more animals. It is easy to show that creatures that have short life spans such as mice, fish and spiders live longer if they eat less.

All things being equal, then, cutting calories by about a third should also help people to dramatically live longer and proponents of the idea are actively dieting.
"All things, however, are not equal," Phelan and Rose wrote in their report, published in the journal Aging Research Reviews. "Longevity is not a trait that exists in isolation; it evolves as part of a complex life history, with a wide range of underpinning physiological mechanisms involving, among other things, chronic disease processes."

For instance, in mice, starvation reduces fertility, which in turn lengthens life span as the animal is not stressed by repeated matings and pregnancies and the associated production of hormones, they said.

Now aren't you glad you read this? So remember boys and girls, if you don't eat you'll die....of course if you do eat you'll still die.

I (however) have the soulution to this...vexing little problem, and for the ridiculously low price of ONLY $29.95 +S&H I'll be happy to share it.
(note: Patent Pending)

Thought for the day :
"If you don't think too good, don't think too much."
Ted Williams

MORNING GLORY FOLKS!

The only remaining AAAV pic that Sam didn't scrounge

Getting Personal

Read:Matthew 1:18-25

The virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which is translated, "God with us." —Matthew 1:23

Bible In One Year: 1 Chronicles 27-29

Read:
Matthew 1:18-25