DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Planes, Copters, Blimps » Osprey at War

Osprey at War

Although the Marines have been keep­ing a tight lid on what’s going on with the Osprey since VMM-​​263 arrived at al Assad a cou­ple of weeks ago, our inside sources relay that after a cou­ple of sor­ties in coun­try it’s “so far, so good.”

Here’s a photo of the “Thunder Chickens” ready­ing for launch from the USS Wasp:

V-22s on Wasp deck.jpg

And here’s a shot of a V-​​22 launch­ing off the front end of Wasp after a “rolling go,” the launch method of choice for the Osprey. (From the look of the moun­tains in the back­ground I’d say this photo was taken off the coast of Oman in the Straits of Hormuz.) According to Navy NewsStand, this photo was taken in the Gulf of Aqaba.

V-22 launches from Wasp.jpg

(Official U.S. Navy photos)

– Ward

Share |

October 18th, 2007 | Planes, Copters, Blimps | 260647 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2007/10/18/osprey-at-war/Osprey+at+War2007-10-18+20%3A08%3A12paisley You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Opening the Nano-​​World | Corps Asks for MRAP Slowdown » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Solomon says:
    October 18, 2007 at 4:00 pm

    Good info from the guys in the­ater Ward…I would “assume” that logis­ti­cal rather than tac­ti­cal mis­sions (maybe with the excep­tion of medi­vacs) will be the rule of thumb until fac­tors like dust, heat etc are deemed safe. But like you reported –so far so good.

    Reply
  2. Penta says:
    October 18, 2007 at 4:15 pm

    Thunder Chickens.
    Best. Name. Ever.
    Might there be a link to a unit patch about?

    Reply
  3. Camp says:
    October 18, 2007 at 5:56 pm

    Penta,
    Wiki: VMM-​​263
    http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​V​M​M​-​263
    YouTubed: V-​​22
    http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​e​L​3​x​2​k​i​N​jL8

    Reply
  4. 22lr says:
    October 18, 2007 at 7:43 pm

    Who came up with Thunder Chickens, give that guy/​gal a raise. I cant wait to hear how effec­tive they will be.

    Reply
  5. dan says:
    October 19, 2007 at 9:03 am

    I very much doubt that Ospreys are being launched from points that — from the photo — would clearly be well within Iranian ter­ri­to­r­ial waters ( the topog­ra­phy on the Omani side is rel­a­tively flat ).
    The launch point is, if you care to pon­der the pic­ture, almost cer­tainly the Gulf of Aqaba.

    Reply
  6. Dave says:
    October 19, 2007 at 10:29 am

    I’d like to know the opin­ion of peo­ple with expe­ri­ence and knowl­edge in this area:
    Do you think the Osprey is the right pur­chase for it’s intended mis­sions, or is it a gold-​​plated mistake?

    Reply
  7. Ismel says:
    October 19, 2007 at 10:53 am

    Well our marines are alreaady there. We just have to put our trust in thier abil­i­ties and train­ing. I believe that it is the right pur­chase for it’s intended mis­sion, I mean look at what the osprey can do more pay­load, more speed, lands like a heli.… I don’t know thats just my opinion.

    Reply
  8. C. Foskey says:
    October 19, 2007 at 11:19 am

    @ Ismel
    more pay­load than what?

    Reply
  9. Galrahn says:
    October 19, 2007 at 11:42 am

    http://​www​.navy​.mil/​v​i​e​w​_​s​i​n​g​l​e​.​a​s​p​?​i​d​=​5​1​723
    Maybe the cap­tion regard­ing the loca­tion is more accurate.

    Reply
  10. springbored says:
    October 19, 2007 at 1:01 pm

    Noted the caption…And no men­tion of the Osprey break­down in Jordan, neither.…or you gotta go to a rep­utable blog to get that kinda news? Like mine!
    Really. You guys must decide if defensetech is just another advocacy/​political mil­blog or a trusted uber-​​blog that frames debate for read­ers and the mil­blog com­mu­nity. If the lat­ter, then changes need to be made.
    How can you have a dis­cus­sion like Dave wants if you don’t report this porgram’s warts, farts and fumbles?

    Reply
  11. Dennis says:
    October 19, 2007 at 2:29 pm

    Come on Springbored,
    I agree “warts and all” should be shown, but I once helped a fel­low F-​​14 squadron try and get deployed. They were in sad shape.
    From Oceana to San Diego they left a string of bro­ken down craft…3 of the twelve did not make it cross coun­try.
    Sad and pathetic, but no-​​one was blog­ging that the F-​​14 should be scrapped.
    My squadron was the unfor­tu­nate one that found out that if an F-​​14 with the new engines was left at after­burner for long peri­ods of time, at sea level, they blow up.
    A lot of F-14’s crashed over their life­time. But we had a mis­sion.
    I am not say­ing we should not put equip­ment under the micro­scope and we should not con­tinue to make equip­ment bet­ter.
    But it gets tir­ing see­ing peo­ple be super crit­i­cal of things that are inher­ently dan­ger­ous.
    The Osprey is brand new tech­nol­ogy. They are going to have prob­lems, they will crash, peo­ple will die.
    How many test pilots died push­ing the fron­tiers of air­craft? Early heli­copters?
    Does that mean their sac­ri­fice was in vain?
    No, they gave us the means to defeat the Axis in WW2, and stare down the Soviets.
    The men putting their lives on the line going into com­bat in the Osprey give or forces a strate­gic advan­tage no other fight­ing force in the world has.
    As the rest of the world buys and steals our tech­nol­ogy in a game of catch up, we need to inno­vate.
    We should not be slowed by a “bet­ter safe than sorry” men­tal­ity when it comes to tech­no­log­i­cal devel­op­ment.
    Other coun­tries are watch­ing us and they do not play it safe.

    Reply
  12. 22lr says:
    October 19, 2007 at 3:12 pm

    I totally agree with Dennis on that. Heck we haven’t even seen if the V-​​22s can take enemy fire and keep fly­ing. People for­get about the thing hav­ing wings, it will glide a heck of a lot bet­ter than a Blackhawk. I would fly in a V-​​22 into com­bat any­day, with my M-​​16, and M-​​9 by my side. I see unlim­ited poten­tial for the V-​​22, heck think of water inser­tions, or CSAR. Dang thing baby has seri­ous potential.

    Reply
  13. Ward says:
    October 19, 2007 at 5:26 pm

    Quite frankly, Dennis, your out­look demon­strates the dif­fer­ence between those who’ve been there and done that and the oth­ers who sel­dom leave the house but have been given a soap­box by virtue of the Internet.
    It’s refresh­ing to hear from a fleet player. Thanks for keep­ing ‘em flying.

    Reply
  14. Mark Pyruz says:
    October 19, 2007 at 8:31 pm

    Ward:
    I was going to com­ment last night that the moun­tain range in the back­ground didn’t match the Straight of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf. Then I thought hard and tried to remem­ber the topog­ra­phy of the Gulf of Oman. It didn’t quite match either. Now its listed as the Gulf of Aquaba, and that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for mak­ing the correction.

    Reply
  15. Ward says:
    October 20, 2007 at 9:51 am

    It’s all you guys, Mark and Galrahn. Keep keep­ing us honest.

    Reply
  16. Galrahn says:
    October 20, 2007 at 2:57 pm

    Ward,
    Np. I appre­ci­ate you giv­ing the MV-​​22B atten­tion. We need this plat­form, although I admit I’m not in the group that is sold on it.
    I’ll be inter­ested to see how the logis­tics sup­port for the MV-​​22B goes, with all the indus­try assis­tance and the real­ity they deployed extra mechan­ics and per­sonal, I’m curi­ous if the cost of deploy­ment for the MV-​​22 is just one more case where the USMC empha­sis (note dif­fer­ence between empha­sis and pres­ence) of the MV-​​22B as the sole medium lift replace­ment is really the best way ahead.

    Reply
  17. Chris says:
    October 21, 2007 at 4:40 pm

    Complete out­sider here just look­ing for info.… if those moun­tains in the back­ground are Iranian, then how wide is the Gulf and where’s the bor­der?? Cuz by my reck­on­ing that shore­line is less than 20 miles away.. would launch­ing active oper­a­tions in a 2nd coun­try, from the waters of an unfriendly 3rd be deemed provoca­tive? Or just a mat­ter of course as long as you don’t ram an Iranian gun­boat while you’re at it?

    Reply
  18. Chris says:
    October 21, 2007 at 4:46 pm

    nev­er­mind, i see the Gulf of Aqaba is in the Red Sea, not the Persian Gulf… seems like an awe­fully long trip to Iraq from there… but it solves the Iranian ques­tion.
    Thanks, great site as always.

    Reply
  19. Ward says:
    October 21, 2007 at 7:06 pm

    Chris:
    It’s not a long flight if you tran­sit over Saudi Arabia, which they did. I did that trek with a pair of Tomcats in ’95 … barely cleared the Ditch and launched for Al Jabar, Kuwait. Fun times!

    Reply
  20. SMSgt Mac says:
    October 21, 2007 at 9:35 pm

    “pedan­tic poseur“
    hehe…That’s gonna leave a mark.

    Reply
  21. Grandjester says:
    October 23, 2007 at 10:01 am

    Yeah Ward,
    Wah wah, Time mis­qoted me, wah wah, AP took my com­ments out of con­text.
    Dennis and all the other out there who keep call­inf the Osprey “new”, that is absolute crap.
    This tech­nol­ogy was demo’d by the XV-​​3 over 50 years ago, the two-​​engine vari­ant XV-​​15 flew in 1972 (the Soviet attempt, Ka-​​22, was in the early 60’s). Osprey was spec’d in 1981, still took nearly a decade to fly and has had noth­ing but prob­lems since.
    All of the com­par­isons made to this craft don’t even come close. Mane another craft with 50 years of devel­op­ment, name another craft that has killed 30 Marines dur­ing test­ing. We went from Mercury to Apollo and the moon for less money and less loss of life. These thing cost as much as an F-​​22 and HAVE NO ARAMAMENT (that pea-​​shooter out the ass doesn’t count for a damn thing dur­ing an assault).
    And of course, no ACTUAL reports from the field.
    Ridiculous.

    Reply
  22. SGT Jeff (USAR) says:
    October 23, 2007 at 11:13 am

    I thought the Time Mag arti­cle was a total hit piece… “no for­ward fir­ing weapons” (nei­ther does the CH-​​46, 47 or UH-​​60 (at least not as nor­mally con­fig­ured)… unable to autoro­tate after los­ing both engines (note: M/​CH-​​47s appar­ently don’t autoro­tate after being hit by RPG’s either and they glide exactly like a brick)… it just sort of went on and on from there.
    Admittedly, it would be nice if they could fit GeCal .50 Gatling guns on the tail ramp and some­where along the sides that they wouldn’t shoot out the engines/​propellers, and maybe for even more fun stick some pod­ded .50 cal’s on the side a-​​la the B25 com­merce raiders of WWII.
    One thing I haven’t heard about yet — with the Marine’s ten­ta­tively propos­ing to go it alone in Afghanistan, how is the high alti­tude ver­ti­cal per­for­mance of the Osprey?

    Reply
  23. Ward says:
    October 23, 2007 at 8:34 pm

    GJ:
    Tell us how you come into your wis­dom. Have you ever been to Pax or New River or Edwards and talked to the folks involved with the pro­gram? Have you ever actu­ally seen a V-​​22 not to men­tion rid­den in one?
    And can you tell us how bud­gets work and how require­ments are estab­lished and how OPEVALS are con­ducted and how IOC is deter­mined?
    If not, you are cleared to chill the hell out.
    You’re enti­tled to your opin­ion, of course, but your tone sucks.

    Reply
  24. Grandjester says:
    October 24, 2007 at 8:48 am

    Ward,
    Stings, don’t it? What the F does my TONE have to do with it? You got punked by Time and AP and DESPITE being johnny on the spot, PAX vet, 22 apologist/​spokesman, you and the other cheer­lead­ers HAVE NO ANSWER, and respond with shiny, happy BS about a plat­form that is “trou­bled” AT BEST. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, jus­ti­fies this air­frame. Despite not hav­ing worked directly on this pro­gram, I have worked in the Defense indus­try long enough to rec­og­nize good money being thrown after bad.
    As YOU YOURSELF HAVE PUT IT. This thing WILL GET (MORE) MARINES KILLED.

    Reply
  25. Ward says:
    October 24, 2007 at 2:38 pm

    Sting? Is that what it is? No, I don’t think so. I’ve been slammed by bet­ter than you … although I don’t know you, do I? So maybe you’re the BEST I’ve ever been slammed by.
    Could. Well. Be.
    But it would be great when you had some­thing to say, you would just say it and leave the ad hominem stuff out of it.
    Or don’t. It’s a free blog, after all.
    And what’s with the secret iden­tity? You can cheap­shot me with every­thing that lives in the pub­lic record but I have to believe you have a clue based on what? Because you say so … Grand … jester? Or is that really your name, like Cher or Madonna?
    Or is there some­thing else going on here … some­thing totally dis­turb­ing and trau­matic that pre­vents you from com­ing for­ward with your true self?
    No, I doubt it. It’s noth­ing but weak sauce.
    But, what­ever. Every cir­cus needs clowns (even angry ones) along with peanut vendors.

    Reply
  26. Grandjester says:
    October 24, 2007 at 4:04 pm

    Sorry Ward,
    Thought you were upset by the cracks about Time and AP. I have been using the Grandjester han­dle for about 4 years and it seem to fit (nice one on the “clown” com­ment, never heard that one before), and it’s no big mys­tery. Google me, I have a semi-​​complete Bio over at Military​.com too. Hell, I have been com­ment­ing here for over a year, and you will find that there are three things that I have been con­sis­tant in my crit­i­cism of: MRAP, F-​​35 and yes, your baby, V-​​22.
    Ward, believe it or not, I gen­er­ally enjoy your writ­ing and know­ing the 22 is your soft spot, I have ham­mered on it, so I apol­o­gize if I have crossed a line.

    Reply
  27. Michael says:
    October 31, 2007 at 5:21 pm

    Although VP Cheney is a ghastly Jack O Lantern on the lat­est New Yorker cover, there is one thing he did right as SecDefense in the early 90s. He tried to can­cel the V22 Osprey (Gooney Bird?) four times. The army did not want it in 1992. The Time cover story of Oct 8 ’07 is reveal­ing and Business Week has a story about the civil­ian ver­sion. If just one crashes, it will be a Pentagon night­mare. Hell, a German ver­sion, the Weser 1003, was on draw­ing boards in WWII. How about the num­ber of marine pilots who have died in the AV8 Harrier jump jet?

    Reply
  28. Node says:
    November 4, 2007 at 2:01 am

    I’m sur­prised they are prop dri­ven, any­thing prop dri­ven would have a like­lier chance of get­ting hit by a stinger or so. And if they are wor­ried about the Blackhawks falling like a brick when get­ting hit then why not have an emer­gency chute built in above the blades or on the tail to slow its descent. I just dont like the way those huge props on the 22 are! Big and bulky, what if one of the engines gets hit by a rocket or so while fly­ing hor­i­zon­tally then most likely the props will slice the front half of the air­craft from the back sec­tion or you’ll get a prop blade sliced into the air­craft, either way it spells dis­as­ter! I’m not try­ing to harp ‚but i’m just look­ing at the phys­i­cal prop­er­ties of the aircraft!

    Reply
  29. node says:
    November 4, 2007 at 2:04 am

    I’m sur­prised they are prop dri­ven, any­thing prop dri­ven would have a like­lier chance of get­ting hit by a stinger or so. And if they are wor­ried about the Blackhawks falling like a brick when get­ting hit then why not have an emer­gency chute built in above the blades or on the tail to slow its descent. I just dont like the way those huge props on the 22 are! Big and bulky, what if one of the engines gets hit by a rocket or so while fly­ing hor­i­zon­tally then most likely the props will slice the front half of the air­craft from the back sec­tion or you’ll get a prop blade sliced into the air­craft, either way it spells dis­as­ter! I’m not try­ing to harp ‚but i’m just look­ing at the phys­i­cal prop­er­ties of the aircraft!

    Reply
  30. node says:
    November 4, 2007 at 2:17 am

    I’m sur­prised they are prop dri­ven, any­thing prop dri­ven would have a like­lier chance of get­ting hit by a stinger or so. And if they are wor­ried about the Blackhawks falling like a brick when get­ting hit then why not have an emer­gency chute built in above the blades or on the tail to slow its descent. I just dont like the way those huge props on the 22 are! Big and bulky, what if one of the engines gets hit by a rocket or so while fly­ing hor­i­zon­tally then most likely the props will slice the front half of the air­craft from the back sec­tion or you’ll get a prop blade sliced into the air­craft, either way it spells dis­as­ter! I’m not try­ing to harp ‚but i’m just look­ing at the phys­i­cal prop­er­ties of the aircraft!

    Reply
  31. judge1 says:
    November 4, 2007 at 2:18 am

    I’m sur­prised they are prop dri­ven, any­thing prop dri­ven would have a like­lier chance of get­ting hit by a stinger or so. And if they are wor­ried about the Blackhawks falling like a brick when get­ting hit then why not have an emer­gency chute built in above the blades or on the tail to slow its descent. I just dont like the way those huge props on the 22 are! Big and bulky, what if one of the engines gets hit by a rocket or so while fly­ing hor­i­zon­tally then most likely the props will slice the front half of the air­craft from the back sec­tion or you’ll get a prop blade sliced into the air­craft, either way it spells dis­as­ter! I’m not try­ing to harp ‚but i’m just look­ing at the phys­i­cal prop­er­ties of the aircraft!

    Reply
  32. GJB says:
    November 4, 2007 at 9:03 am

    Ward,
    How much actual stick time do you have in the Osprey?

    Reply
  33. Habbo gold says:
    August 14, 2008 at 12:50 am

    I know that you are not a sloppy per­son, you have your aspi­ra­tion, have your ideal. You will not care the game Habbo gold. Therefore you are doomed to leave Habbo, leave friends who these share some hard­ships, and leave me who am lonely apprentice.

    Reply
  34. LOTRO Gold says:
    August 14, 2008 at 12:55 am

    Finally, I gained have suf­ficed the LOTRO Gold, had the fam­ily. We were in together finally.

    Reply
  35. last chaos gold says:
    August 14, 2008 at 12:58 am

    Remember we just met with each other by chance, we prac­ticed the level and made last chaos gold together.

    Reply
  36. mabinogi gold says:
    August 14, 2008 at 1:01 am

    So I spent some mabinogi gold to study. After school study the lov­able gray wolf became col­lapses at the first blow.

    Reply
  37. Metin2 yang says:
    August 19, 2008 at 1:12 am

    Of course the Metin2 yang can bring funs. I believed that you will love this Metin2 gold new game.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I wonder if anyone noticed: This attack happened right after...
      freefallingbomb
    • Keep it Simple
      To the poster "Zandor" : You wrote: "Your last post...
      freefallingbomb
    • Airbag Defense
      Part III : You wrote: "These airbags are made similarly, so the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Airbag Defense
      To the educated guesser: Part I : …………...
      freefallingbomb
    • Special Forces Say ‘No’ to M4 Barrel
      Only two companies in the world are...
      Frank Hols
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Dear Designer; It is somewhat strange that the German Armed forces...
      Zandor
    • Special Forces Say ‘No’ to M4 Barrel
      The first priority is to get a reliable...
      Brian
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      I've seen them to. Believe me, I hate those 19 just as much as...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      You are funny.
      Zandor
    • Adapting Women to Subs
      Wow after reading these varied comments, I am surprised and educated. I...
      John
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage