5 ms·

Ha, I love the "rescue ops". This will not primarily be for rescue ops. This will be for supporting Marine standin operations on and within the first island ch

Ha, I love the "rescue ops". This will not primarily be for rescue ops. This will be for supporting Marine standin operations on and within the first island chain. The marines have been trying to figure out how they can handle sustainment and logistics in that environment. You can read some wonkish article about this (back in 2022) https://warontherocks.com/2022/09/sustainment-of-the-stand-in-force/ https://warontherocks.com/2022/09/sustainment-of-the-stand-i... . You'll note that the article does suggest revisiting seaplanes as a distribution option. With a few hundred miles range, these craft would be suitable as one way island to island hoppers, or 2 way over the horizon ship to shore transports. For a sense of scale, its ~140 miles from Luzon to Scarborough Shoal (one of the contested islands in the South China Sea). The "Viceroy" craft that Regent has mocked up on their website claims 180 mile range, 3500lb of cargo / 2 crew + 12 passengers. EDIT: And to be clear, the article title says "to get", but the article makes clear, this is basically a testing and development contract. There's no certainty that the Marines will get this capability in any meaningful way. Probably better to replace with "to test". This is particularly important because the commercial version of this craft is also still in development and testing.

mlyle 2y ago
> This will not primarily be for rescue ops It seems like combat SAR in the maritime environment is what these are best at. > The "Viceroy" craft that Regent has mocked up on their website claims 180 mile range, 3500lb of cargo / 2 crew + 12 passengers. This is like 1/4th the size needed for minimum scale sustainment and support. Not to say that it won't be used for that in a pinch or for special operations, but it's pretty limited. Of course, there's been talk about building huge ones.
- icegreentea2 2y ago
  The company press release states "The second phase of work will examine seaglider capabilities across missions including contested logistics and medevac/casevac". I agree that this would be useful for medevac/casevac, but I'm less sure about the search part of SAR. 180 miles is not a lot of range for searching. I still believe this is primarily about contested logistics, because the USMC still hasn't solved that issue. One of the stand in force concept's biggest weakness right now is how will the marines go about sustaining the force. There's a lot of good ideas written down, but concretely they still don't have good solutions. I think it's fairly clear that the Marines will look to unnamed undersea vehicles as one vector, but I think they're looking for flexibility and redundancy (and certainly the speed that these guys offer would be interesting). What's written about SIFs is that the Marines anticipate the majority of SIFs to be deployed in the crisis building phase. They do not envision on day one of a shooting war, somehow dispersing all of their forces across the first island chain - they take for granted that they will somehow do that in the build up. After that, then ya, maybe just med/casevac and resupply is what they're after. I have a hard time finding concrete examples, but I always envisioned an example detachment being roughly platoon sized. Basically, imagine being able to man a NMESIS launcher or two, ISR, and a squad or two of infantry for security. I think at that point, these vehicles become more viable for certain types of sustainment. You could for example priority rush more NSMs to a detachment.
  - vonmoltke 2y ago
    > but I'm less sure about the search part of SAR The article never mentioned the search part of SAR, only the rescue part. The range is still something of an issue with that, though, as you'd need to be fairly close the people needing rescuing. So I still agree that contested rescue is likely a side mission for this.
  - hammock 2y ago
    Pretty sure the search mission has been taken over by sats and drones for the most part
  - mlyle 2y ago
    > I think at that point, these vehicles become more viable for certain types of sustainment. You could for example priority rush more NSMs to a detachment. Sure-- like 3 per trip. If they're not too long for the vehicle (they might be). You might be able to barely sustain a platoon-sized force with a trip per day, but this seems very marginal.
  - CapricornNoble 2y ago
    > I have a hard time finding concrete examples, but I always envisioned an example detachment being roughly platoon sized. Basically, imagine being able to man a NMESIS launcher or two, ISR, and a squad or two of infantry for security. Most of the scenarios I've participated in have involved reinforced companies.
tylerflick 2y ago
I laughed when I saw the article photo combined with the headline. The Marines will be island hopping in Higgins boats again before these are adopted. How long did it take it for the Osprey to make it into service?
- mikeyouse 2y ago
  > How long did it take it for the Osprey to make it into service? I was curious so I went and looked; 1981 - Initial development contract awarded 1983 - Bell/Boeing submitted their prototype and since it was the only submission, they were awarded the contract 1985 - Osprey designation established, first full size prototypes under development 1988 - First Osprey was finished 1989 - First testing of the prototypes started and first flight in helicopter mode (several of the prototypes crashed) 1994 - Bell/Boeing received production contract for EMD phase 1997 - First EMD flight + more testing 2005 - Full rate production authorized 2007 - Marines began fielding them They were still testing the various modes (carrier onboard deliveries, etc) into the 2020s but the most favorable case is that it took over 25 years from prototype to service.
  - psunavy03 2y ago
    COD wasn't "testing various modes." It was a completely new requirement to replace Navy C-2s which were reaching end of life. It wasn't part of the original contract; it was a completely new "oh, we have this on the shelf and it's fit enough for purpose."
    - mikeyouse 2y ago
      Yeah fair, I jumped to that since it was in the Wiki but through the 2010's there were a number of other options for development milestones.
    - GolfPopper 2y ago
      Except it isn't - the V-22 fleet is currently limited to flight 200nm or less due to mechanical concerns. [1] I'm not sure what the US Navy is currently doing or planning for near-future COD. (Beyond ordering more Ospreys. [2]) Pray they don't end up in a real hot war with a peer adversary, I guess? 1. https://news.usni.org/2025/02/11/navy-marines-learning-to-make-do-as-v-22-restrictions-endure https://news.usni.org/2025/02/11/navy-marines-learning-to-ma... 2. https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2025/us-navy-orders-five-additional-boeing-cmv-22b-osprey-aircraft-to-strengthen-carrier-based-logistics-capabilities https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2025/us-navy-...
meigwilym 2y ago
> This will not primarily be for rescue ops. The "radar-evading" rather gives the game away.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  Radar evasion is very useful if you're rescuing someone from enemy/contested territory.
- psunavy03 2y ago
  SAR assets can still be shot at. Opposed SAR is something the Navy and Marine Corps train to.
ge96 2y ago
Would be a cool life, you operate a converted PBY Catalina that is a cargo plane and you bum around ferrying stuff
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  It's a thing! https://www.instagram.com/thatmallardguy/ https://www.instagram.com/thatmallardguy/
  - ge96 2y ago
    Oh man that's cool. It would be impractical but an S-38 would be cool too but I'm biased from The Aviator
- alabastervlog 2y ago
  Tales of the Gold Monkey / TaleSpin / that one season of Archer, has been the fantasy-life I wanted since I was very young. I mean, I'm sure any real-world version of it would actually suck, though.
  - ge96 2y ago
    Yeah I need a bathroom connected to a plumbing system for ex
- brudgers 2y ago
  A DC3 is probably more practical. But certainly less romantic.
  - ge96 2y ago
    I hear there's a Philippine Mars not doing anything
jdiez17 2y ago
> Ha, I love the "rescue ops". > This will not primarily be for rescue ops. It's a common meme in dual use tech. When you apply for funding you mention "search and rescue applications" and people know what's up.
- jkaptur 2y ago
  Including https://xkcd.com/2128/ https://xkcd.com/2128/
timewizard 2y ago
> With a few hundred miles range 180 mile range, 180 knot speed, needs recharging infrastructure at both ends of the journey. This is a toy with very little operational utility.
- GolfPopper 2y ago
  >a toy with very little operational utility A perfect match for the modern Marine Corps! (Somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but a Marine Corps that has abandoned amphibious assault and port seizure in favor of helping the Navy with sea control has arguably lost its reason for existing.) https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/amphibious-assault-over https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-...
mmooss 2y ago
While I'm sure the US military sees the obvious possible logisitical solution for the island chains - and I've read them saying that in the past - that doesn't mean there's something deceitful going on here. Before you make national security depend on a new, developing technology, and one that is also in limited supply, you give that technology a simpler, smaller mission to try it out and to develop it. That is, they don't want control of the first island chain to depend on Regent Craft all-electric sea gliders quite yet.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
maxglute 2y ago
Well TBF they will be likely primarily used to "rescue" marines off suicide deployments in 1IC. Marine haphazardly rebranded themselves into MLR / littoral regiment, AKA NMESIS missile battery uber drivers for Pacific theatre to stay relevant. But anyone with half a brain saw how proposal was not sustainable one way mission for crayon eaters. 12 passengers + 3500lb cargon won't reinforce much, i.e. replenish couple Naval Strike Missiles... but likely just supplies to keep the people going, but more realistically it's good for evacuating whose left + body bags because region is going to be saturated with PRC fires. This glider proposal is consoling marines MLR that yes, their rebranding / new conop/conemp isn't terminally stupid, there is an exit plan after hopefully the NMESIS squeeze off their shots, assuming they survive PRC drones/missiles etc.
djfivyvusn 2y ago
Ww3 is gonna be wild.

mlyle 2y ago

> This will not primarily be for rescue ops It seems like combat SAR in the maritime environment is what these are best at. > The "Viceroy" craft that Regent has mocked up on their website claims 180 mile range, 3500lb of cargo / 2 crew + 12 passengers. This is like 1/4th the size needed for minimum scale sustainment and support. Not to say that it won't be used for that in a pinch or for special operations, but it's pretty limited. Of course, there's been talk about building huge ones.

icegreentea2 2y ago
The company press release states "The second phase of work will examine seaglider capabilities across missions including contested logistics and medevac/casevac". I agree that this would be useful for medevac/casevac, but I'm less sure about the search part of SAR. 180 miles is not a lot of range for searching. I still believe this is primarily about contested logistics, because the USMC still hasn't solved that issue. One of the stand in force concept's biggest weakness right now is how will the marines go about sustaining the force. There's a lot of good ideas written down, but concretely they still don't have good solutions. I think it's fairly clear that the Marines will look to unnamed undersea vehicles as one vector, but I think they're looking for flexibility and redundancy (and certainly the speed that these guys offer would be interesting). What's written about SIFs is that the Marines anticipate the majority of SIFs to be deployed in the crisis building phase. They do not envision on day one of a shooting war, somehow dispersing all of their forces across the first island chain - they take for granted that they will somehow do that in the build up. After that, then ya, maybe just med/casevac and resupply is what they're after. I have a hard time finding concrete examples, but I always envisioned an example detachment being roughly platoon sized. Basically, imagine being able to man a NMESIS launcher or two, ISR, and a squad or two of infantry for security. I think at that point, these vehicles become more viable for certain types of sustainment. You could for example priority rush more NSMs to a detachment.
- vonmoltke 2y ago
  > but I'm less sure about the search part of SAR The article never mentioned the search part of SAR, only the rescue part. The range is still something of an issue with that, though, as you'd need to be fairly close the people needing rescuing. So I still agree that contested rescue is likely a side mission for this.
- hammock 2y ago
  Pretty sure the search mission has been taken over by sats and drones for the most part
- mlyle 2y ago
  > I think at that point, these vehicles become more viable for certain types of sustainment. You could for example priority rush more NSMs to a detachment. Sure-- like 3 per trip. If they're not too long for the vehicle (they might be). You might be able to barely sustain a platoon-sized force with a trip per day, but this seems very marginal.
- CapricornNoble 2y ago
  > I have a hard time finding concrete examples, but I always envisioned an example detachment being roughly platoon sized. Basically, imagine being able to man a NMESIS launcher or two, ISR, and a squad or two of infantry for security. Most of the scenarios I've participated in have involved reinforced companies.

tylerflick 2y ago

I laughed when I saw the article photo combined with the headline. The Marines will be island hopping in Higgins boats again before these are adopted. How long did it take it for the Osprey to make it into service?

mikeyouse 2y ago
> How long did it take it for the Osprey to make it into service? I was curious so I went and looked; 1981 - Initial development contract awarded 1983 - Bell/Boeing submitted their prototype and since it was the only submission, they were awarded the contract 1985 - Osprey designation established, first full size prototypes under development 1988 - First Osprey was finished 1989 - First testing of the prototypes started and first flight in helicopter mode (several of the prototypes crashed) 1994 - Bell/Boeing received production contract for EMD phase 1997 - First EMD flight + more testing 2005 - Full rate production authorized 2007 - Marines began fielding them They were still testing the various modes (carrier onboard deliveries, etc) into the 2020s but the most favorable case is that it took over 25 years from prototype to service.
- psunavy03 2y ago
  COD wasn't "testing various modes." It was a completely new requirement to replace Navy C-2s which were reaching end of life. It wasn't part of the original contract; it was a completely new "oh, we have this on the shelf and it's fit enough for purpose."
  - mikeyouse 2y ago
    Yeah fair, I jumped to that since it was in the Wiki but through the 2010's there were a number of other options for development milestones.
  - GolfPopper 2y ago
    Except it isn't - the V-22 fleet is currently limited to flight 200nm or less due to mechanical concerns. [1] I'm not sure what the US Navy is currently doing or planning for near-future COD. (Beyond ordering more Ospreys. [2]) Pray they don't end up in a real hot war with a peer adversary, I guess? 1. https://news.usni.org/2025/02/11/navy-marines-learning-to-make-do-as-v-22-restrictions-endure https://news.usni.org/2025/02/11/navy-marines-learning-to-ma... 2. https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2025/us-navy-orders-five-additional-boeing-cmv-22b-osprey-aircraft-to-strengthen-carrier-based-logistics-capabilities https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2025/us-navy-...

meigwilym 2y ago

> This will not primarily be for rescue ops. The "radar-evading" rather gives the game away.

ceejayoz 2y ago
Radar evasion is very useful if you're rescuing someone from enemy/contested territory.
psunavy03 2y ago
SAR assets can still be shot at. Opposed SAR is something the Navy and Marine Corps train to.

ge96 2y ago

Would be a cool life, you operate a converted PBY Catalina that is a cargo plane and you bum around ferrying stuff

ceejayoz 2y ago
It's a thing! https://www.instagram.com/thatmallardguy/ https://www.instagram.com/thatmallardguy/
- ge96 2y ago
  Oh man that's cool. It would be impractical but an S-38 would be cool too but I'm biased from The Aviator
alabastervlog 2y ago
Tales of the Gold Monkey / TaleSpin / that one season of Archer, has been the fantasy-life I wanted since I was very young. I mean, I'm sure any real-world version of it would actually suck, though.
- ge96 2y ago
  Yeah I need a bathroom connected to a plumbing system for ex
brudgers 2y ago
A DC3 is probably more practical. But certainly less romantic.
- ge96 2y ago
  I hear there's a Philippine Mars not doing anything

jdiez17 2y ago

> Ha, I love the "rescue ops". > This will not primarily be for rescue ops. It's a common meme in dual use tech. When you apply for funding you mention "search and rescue applications" and people know what's up.

jkaptur 2y ago
Including https://xkcd.com/2128/ https://xkcd.com/2128/

timewizard 2y ago

> With a few hundred miles range 180 mile range, 180 knot speed, needs recharging infrastructure at both ends of the journey. This is a toy with very little operational utility.

GolfPopper 2y ago
>a toy with very little operational utility A perfect match for the modern Marine Corps! (Somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but a Marine Corps that has abandoned amphibious assault and port seizure in favor of helping the Navy with sea control has arguably lost its reason for existing.) https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/amphibious-assault-over https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-...

mmooss 2y ago

While I'm sure the US military sees the obvious possible logisitical solution for the island chains - and I've read them saying that in the past - that doesn't mean there's something deceitful going on here. Before you make national security depend on a new, developing technology, and one that is also in limited supply, you give that technology a simpler, smaller mission to try it out and to develop it. That is, they don't want control of the first island chain to depend on Regent Craft all-electric sea gliders quite yet.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

maxglute 2y ago

Well TBF they will be likely primarily used to "rescue" marines off suicide deployments in 1IC. Marine haphazardly rebranded themselves into MLR / littoral regiment, AKA NMESIS missile battery uber drivers for Pacific theatre to stay relevant. But anyone with half a brain saw how proposal was not sustainable one way mission for crayon eaters. 12 passengers + 3500lb cargon won't reinforce much, i.e. replenish couple Naval Strike Missiles... but likely just supplies to keep the people going, but more realistically it's good for evacuating whose left + body bags because region is going to be saturated with PRC fires. This glider proposal is consoling marines MLR that yes, their rebranding / new conop/conemp isn't terminally stupid, there is an exit plan after hopefully the NMESIS squeeze off their shots, assuming they survive PRC drones/missiles etc.

djfivyvusn 2y ago

Ww3 is gonna be wild.