CV32

This is the kind of information I am looking for. Did you derive this from the Russian language site you linked?

So who's looking forward to this one? If its anything like Band of Brothers ...

You're right, completely unhelpful, but the effort was appreciated.

No one with any ideas?

From Aviation Week Typhoon Numbers Traded To Secure a Deal Mar 23, 2009 By Andy Nativi and Douglas Barrie The four Eurofighter nations will likely halve their next order for the Typhoon combat aircraft. Expected to be included in the U.K. numbers will be Royal Air Force aircraft diverted to meet a Saudi Arabian order as part of its commitment—a precedent that other partners will also be able to follow. Germany, Italy, Spain and the U.K. are in the final throes of Tranche 3 negotiations, with further meetings expected by the end of this month. Failure to secure a deal shortly means a gap between production batches is increasingly likely, with an unwelcome impact on cost. Some long-lead items, not least of all for the aircraft engines, are already late in being ordered if the Tranche 3 production startup is to be met. The Tranche 3 run was originally meant to total 236 aircraft for the four nations. Funding pressures, and a shift in requirements, mean not all partners will take the previously anticipated total number of Typhoons. Splitting production into two batches, Tranche 3A and 3B, is key to moving ahead, say military officials and industry executives involved in the program. The Tranche 3A order may cover 110 aircraft, including 40 for the RAF. The U.K. originally signaled it would take 88. This number, however, could well include the 24 originally due to be delivered to the RAF as part of its second tranche order, but shifted to meet part of a 72-aircraft order from Saudi Arabia. The first aircraft is expected to be handed over to Riyadh in June. Discussions are also understood to be continuing between the U.K. and Saudi Arabia on a further purchase of 40-48 aircraft. This order could be used to meet the U.K.’s Tranche 3B number. Aircraft and powerplant final assembly of the remaining 48 aircraft from the first order will be carried out in country, as would any follow-on procurement. The partner nations are also asking for life-cycle cost reductions. Work is already underway in a number of areas. They have tasked Eurojet to consider engine enhancements to reduce the overall lifetime cost on the aircraft. This work is due to conclude by midyear. The overall target is to cut life-support costs for the Typhoon by up to 30% using a joint air force/industry approach. Continuing with Tranche 3 by splitting the order also would allow the partner nations to sidestep issues of cancellation penalties, program restructuring costs and industry workshare. Germany and Spain publicly maintain they will complete the acquisition of all the aircraft for which they have subscribed under the “umbrella contract” (180 for Germany and 87 for Spain). London had originally signed up for a total of 232 and Rome, 121. A decision on Tranche 3B could be deferred several years and would be influenced by the further export success of the aircraft. Internal Eurofighter studies suggest a potential export market for 150-200 Tyhpoons, and orders could be used to offset reductions in numbers among the four partner nations. Some industry executives remain sceptical that the U.K. will take any more aircraft for the RAF beyond Tranche 3A. Italy is looking at the possibility of swapping out Tranche 1 aircraft from its inventory—for export sale—and to replace these with Tranche 3 versions. Romania is a potential customer for 24 ex-Italian air force Tranche 1 aircraft, while Bulgaria may present another opportunity. The likely mechanism for any deal would see the Italian air force sell T1 aircraft to Alenia Aeronautica, which would then sell them under a government-to-government framework. Notionally, such a scheme could provide the air force with a way to field an all-T2/T3 Typhoon fleet at a reduced cost. One particularly sensitive area is that of pricing. While pursuing a split purchase, the partner governments still want a unit cost based on a 236-aircraft run. Industry is arguing that either the governments need to commit to substantially more than the 110 aircraft of Tranche 3A or accept that prices should reflect the actual number of aircraft being purchased. A further area yet to be resolved is drawing a road map for the introduction of an active, electronically scanned array radar. The availability of an AESA will be a key factor in some export campaigns, including to India, while the RAF is also eager to secure an upgrade path. Levels of support for an AESA to replace the mechanically scanned Captor differ among the partners. Italy is not particularly keen at present, since the radar would not likely be available until late T3A aircraft, and the country is disinclined to operate two Typhoon standards. Meanwhile, the U.K. has been supporting two AESA research areas—a collaborative effort with the Typhoon partners and a national program, with elements of an AESA radar flown on a Tornado GR4A. Some of the partners are concerned that the U.K. could pursue development of a national standard with its own AESA, perhaps using funding from further export sales, for example, from Saudi Arabia.

From RIA Novosti Russia could focus on tactical nuclear weapons for subs 12:43 | 23/ 03/ 2009 MOSCOW, March 23 (RIA Novosti) - Russia may prioritize the development of nuclear-powered attack submarines armed with nuclear-capable cruise missiles in the future, while maintaining its fleet of strategic subs, a senior Navy official said. The Russian Navy maintains a fleet of about 60 submarines, including 10 nuclear-powered strategic submarines, over 30 nuclear-powered attack submarines, diesel-electric submarines and special-purpose subs. "Probably, tactical nuclear weapons [on submarines] will play a key role in the future," Vice Admiral Oleg Burtsev, deputy head of the Navy General Staff, told RIA Novosti. "Their range and precision are gradually increasing." "There is no longer any need to equip missiles with powerful nuclear warheads. We can install low-yield warheads on existing cruise missiles," he said. The admiral mentioned Russia's new Severodvinsk nuclear-powered attack submarine, which will be commissioned with the Navy in 2010-2011, as an example. The fourth-generation Graney class submarine combines the ability to launch a variety of long-range cruise missiles (up to 3,100 miles) with nuclear warheads, and effectively engage hostile submarines and surface warships. However, Russia will maintain and upgrade its fleet of strategic submarines, carrying ballistic missiles, as a naval component of the nuclear triad. "In this regard, we will build at least six Borey-class strategic submarines to serve in the Northern and the Pacific fleets," Burtsev said. The first Borey-class submarine, the Yury Dolgoruky, was built at the Sevmash plant in northern Russia, and is undergoing mooring trials. It will carry up to 16 Bulava-M sea-based ballistic missiles. Two other Borey class nuclear submarines, the Alexander Nevsky and the Vladimir Monomakh, are currently under construction at the Sevmash shipyard and are expected to be completed in 2009 and 2011.

From RIA Novosti China confirms plans to build aircraft carrier 15:25 | 23/ 03/ 2009 BEIJING, March 23 (RIA Novosti) - China's defense minister has reaffirmed the country's plans to build its own aircraft carrier, the Sina news agency reported on Monday. It quoted Liang Guanglie as saying that "among the big world powers only China does not have an aircraft carrier, so it cannot be without an aircraft carrier forever." China's Ministry of National Defense spokesman said in December last year that aircraft carriers were "a reflection of a nation's comprehensive power" and were needed to meet the demands of a country's navy. Experts have suggested construction could be officially announced in April, when the Chinese Navy marks its 60th anniversary. According to the Wall Street Journal, China's first aircraft carrier will enter service by 2020.

Photos of the damage to USS Hartford Photo 1 Photo 2 Photo 3 Certainly suggestive of a collision while she was at periscope depth.

RAW video of the incident as provided by the Navy Visual News Service and available on YouTube: Video 1 Video 2 Video 3 Video 4 Video 5 Video 6 Video 7 Video 8

Hot Keys in HCE http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...mp;showfile=417 http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...mp;showfile=416 Hot Keys in Harpoon Classic Gold Single Keystrokes B : Bearing only (BOL) weapon launch C : Centers the Unit Window around your currently selected Group D : Platform display F : Full report on the selected object when object is displayed in the dialog box I (and Alt+I) : Group and Unit ID display toggle for the map views M : Free memory display O : Show On Station rectangles for the player side (2008.068+) U : Units; selects the first unit of the currently selected Group (in the Unit Window) V : Sonobuoy display toggle X : Zooms out the current window (Group or Unit) Z : Zooms in the current window (Group or Unit) Arrow keys : Scroll the currently selected window, either the Group window or the Unit window. Enter : Time compression is set to 1:1 . (period key) : Drop sonobuoy Backspace : Objects; selects the next object to the north (up) in the current window Spacebar : Objects; selects the next object to the south (down) in the current window Tab : Active window toggle between Group and Unit Windows - (Minus key) : Time compression; decreases time compression by one increment + (Plus key) : Time compression; increases time compression by one increment 5 (on keypad only) : Centers the map view in the currently selected window around the selected object. Combination Key Strokes Alt combos Alt+3 or Alt +F3 : Nuclear release status enabled in any scenario, regardless of the original setting in the scenario Alt+R : Force air-to-air refueling Alt+T : Path toggle for all friendly groups Ctrl combos Ctrl+A : Staff report Ctrl+B : Order of battle Ctrl+D : Platform displays Ctrl+E : Show orders Ctrl+F : Calculate range and bearing Ctrl+G : Set grid lines Ctrl+H : Game status Ctrl+I : Icon display selector Ctrl+K : Game options Ctrl+L : Load user scenario Ctrl+M : Staff options Ctrl+N : New game Ctrl+O : Load game Ctrl+P : Pause game Ctrl+Q : Quit game Ctrl+R : Range circles display Ctrl+S L: Save game Ctrl+T : Time compression Ctrl+U : Rename installation (in Unit window) [HCE] Ctrl+W : Weather report Ctrl+Y : Sound options Function key combos F1 or Ctrl+1 : Attack or intercept F10 or Ctrl+10 : Staff note dialog for entering staff notes F2 or Ctrl+2 : Speed and depth/altitude dialog for Groups/Units F3 or Ctrl+3 : Course entry dialog for Groups/Units F4 or Ctrl+4 : Formation Editor F5 or Ctrl+5 : Ready aircraft F6 or Ctrl+6 : Launch/land aircraft F7 or Ctrl+7 : Join Group F8 or Ctrl+8 : Split Group F9 or Ctrl+9 : Set sensor dialog Hot Keys in Harpoon Classic Gold Tab : Active window toggle between Group and Unit window F1 or Ctrl+1 : Attack or Intercept Ctrl+Alt+Z : Auto test (machine plays itself) B : Bearing only weapon launch (BOL) Ctrl+F : Calculate range and bearing 5 (on keypad only) : Centers the map view in the currently selected window around the selected object C : Centers the Unit window around your currently selected group. F3 or Ctrl+3 : Course Entry Dialog for Groups/Units . (Period key) : Drop sonobuoy F4 or Ctrl+4 : Formation Editor M : Free memory display F : Full report on the selected object when object is displayed in the dialog box Ctrl+H : Game Status Ctrl+G : Set Grid Lines I or Alt+I : Group and Unit ID display toggle for the map views Ctrl+I : Icon display selector F7 or Ctrl+7 : Join Group F6 or Ctrl+6 : Launch/land aircraft Ctrl+O : Load game Ctrl+L : Load user scenario Ctrl+N : New game Alt+3 or Alt +F3 : Nuclear release status enabled in any scenario, regardless of the original setting in the scenario Backspace : Selects the next object to the north (up) in the current window Spacebar : Selects the next object to the south (down) in the current window Ctrl+K : Game options Ctrl+Y : Sound options Ctrl+M : Staff options Ctrl+B : Order of battle Ctrl+E : Show orders Alt+T : Path toggle for all friendly groups Ctrl+P : Pause game D or Ctrl+D : Platform displays Ctrl+Q : Quit game Ctrl+R : Range circles display F5 or Ctrl+5 : Ready aircraft Alt+R : Force air-to-air refueling Ctrl+S : Save game Arrow keys : Scroll the currently selected window, either the Group window or the Unit window F9 or Ctrl+9 : Set sensor dialog V : Sonobuoy display toggle F2 or Ctrl+2 : Speed and depth/altitude dialog for Groups/Units F8 or Ctrl+8 : Split Group F10 or Ctrl+10 : Staff note dialog for entering staff notes Ctrl+A : Staff report Ctrl+T : Time compression + (Plus key) : Time compression - increases time by one increment - (Minus key) : Time compression - decreases time by one increment Enter : Time compression is set to 1:1 U : Selects the first unit of the currently selected group (in the Unit window) Ctrl+W : Weather Report Z : Zooms in the current window (group or unit) X : Zooms out the current window (group or unit)

Here's something those of you with naval service experience or engineering knowledge might be able to help out with: How long could a warship sustain flank speed? By this I mean pedal to the metal, all out pushing the ship at its maximum capable speed. Now I realize that this varies among propulsion types (steam, diesel, gas, nuclear, etc), ship types, even among individual ships, and of course, flank speed is limited by fuel (something akin to afterburner on a fighter jet), but I'm interested in your educated guesstimate. But if you can be more specific, then by all means please go ahead. If you're really naval engineering tech savvy, then how long do you think before the ship could once again go to flank speed? (i.e. recovery time)

Wow, Pete, that's quite a collection!

From Defence Talk Sea King Helicopter Celebrates 50th Anniversary of First Flight US Navy | Mar 20, 2009 Share & Bookmark: NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, Patuxent River: The H-3 Sea King helicopter community celebrated the 50th anniversary of the aircraft’s historic first flight March 11. The Sea King is a twin-engine, all-weather, amphibious helicopter used for numerous roles that include anti-submarine warfare, anti-ship warfare, search and rescue, transport, communications, airborne early warning and executive transport. “The Sea King was the Jack of all trades and master of all,” said Capt. James “Walleye” Wallace, Support and Commercial Derivative Aircraft (PMA-207) program manager. “It’s saved thousands of lives, protected fleets of ships, recovered astronauts and has flown the President of the United States from 1961 to today.” The Sea King was built in four countries, the United States, England, Italy and Japan and is operated by more than 20 countries around the world. More than 1,500 military and commercial versions have been built worldwide. Currently, there are three Sea Kings still in the Navy inventory, all based here for search and rescue missions. “Once the Sea King is finally retired from U.S. Navy service, it will still continue to serve for years to come,” said Wallace. “We’ve received many queries from countries wanting to buy our retired Sea Kings for their own fleets.” PMA-207 continues to support many active H-3 Sea King Foreign Military Sales customers around the world.

From Navy Times Sub, amphib collide in Hormuz Strait; 15 hurt By Andrew Scutro - Staff writer Posted : Friday Mar 20, 2009 11:50:58 EDT Two U.S. warships are out of action in the Middle East after the attack submarine Hartford and the amphibious transport dock New Orleans collided in calm seas while transiting the Strait of Hormuz into the Persian Gulf in the early morning hours Friday. Fifteen sailors on Hartford were injured but were able to return to duty, according to Navy officials. No injuries were reported aboard New Orleans. The exact circumstances of the 1 a.m. incident are unclear. The Hartford was “submerged but near the surface” at the time of the collision, a source told Navy Times. Both ships are now limping into a local undisclosed port, said Cmdr. Jane Campbell, spokeswoman at 5th Fleet in Bahrain. “They’re both underway on their own power, and both are in the [Persian] Gulf at this point,” she said. “Hartford is on the surface and will remain on the surface until she’s in port.” Damage to the wounded ships is being evaluated. Campbell said initial assessments show two ballast tanks on New Orleans were ruptured, resulting in seawater flooding that required the ship to be stabilized. A fuel tank was also ruptured, causing an estimated spill of 25,000 gallons of marine diesel fuel into the gulf. “She had flooding in three distinct compartments,” Campbell said. “The flooding is secure, and the ship is making way on her own power.” Hartford suffered “visible” damage to the sail and to a bow plane. Campbell could not say if components of the sail such as masts and periscopes are damaged as well, but the sub will make a surface transit into port. “It’s important to point out that Hartford’s [nuclear] powerplant was not affected in this at all,” she said. “We’ll be doing a full incident investigation report as well as a JAGMAN investigation.” This is the third recent collision involving a U.S. submarine in the Strait of Hormuz or the Persian Gulf. On Jan., 8, 2007, the attack submarine Newport News and the Japanese oil tanker Mogamigawa collided in the Strait of Hormuz, a busy strategic chokepoint that runs between Iran and Oman. Both ships were headed south and out of the gulf at night when the submerged submarine was overtaken by the faster-moving tanker sailing on the same route. The movement of the large tanker caused the smaller submarine to be drawn into the ship’s surface wake by the intermingling pressure areas created by their hull washes — a phenomenon known in physics as the “Venturi effect.” In a previous incident, on the night of Sept. 25, 2005, the attack submarine Philadelphia, while traveling on the surface, collided with a Turkish cargo ship off the coast of Bahrain. No one was injured in the collision. Both Philadelphia and Newport News underwent repairs in Bahrain before returning to homeport. Hartford and New Orleans are members of the Boxer Expeditionary Strike Group. Another ship from the group, the dock landing ship Comstock, was in the area at the time of the collision. Boxer remains in the Gulf of Aden on counterpiracy patrol. It and most of the other strike group departed San Diego Jan. 8.

From Examiner Should the F-117 stealth fighter be transferred to Israel? Part Two: The solution March 15, 3:18 PM Part Two continues with a potential partial solution: One quick solution the United States might undertake to immediately restore Israel’s undisputed qualitative edge in the airpower arena in the near term would be to transfer the USAF’s recently retired F117 stealth fighters to the IDF. It will not restore the Israeli advantage over Arab or Iranian operated 4th generation fighters, but it would address the issue of defeating advanced integrated air defense systems to a large extent- weapons systems that will eventually be fielded in the region (if they have not been already). That being said, only an air to air capable 5th generation fighter such as the F-35 or F-22 can address the threat of enemy fighters, but for the time being, the transfer of the F-117 Night Hawk stealth fighter is a good temporary solution. While this idea may seem sacrilegious to many, the transfer of the F-117 is not a huge step. The United States has already agreed to export to Israel the far more advanced and infinitely more capable F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter- however the F-35 will not be available to the IDF until 2014 at the earliest. The F-35 is still in developmental flight testing and will not be operational for quite sometime. As such, the transfer of the F-117 would provide an immediate boost to Israeli capabilities and would signal a firm US commitment to Israeli security by the Obama Administration. The F-117 has been replaced in US service by Lockheed Martin’s outstanding F-22A Raptor air dominance fighter with the surviving F-117 aircraft having been relegated to mothballs in the hangars in Tonopah, Nevada, where they were once based. However, the aging strike aircraft are still formidable warplanes. With the introduction of the Raptor, they represent a redundant capability during a time when the USAF has no money to spare. Being a design that dates back into the 70s, the F-117 is not a particularly advanced aircraft having largely been built from off the shelf components taken from other aircraft. Its faceted design has long since been rendered obsolete by modern computer aided design technologies. Whatever classified technologies that remain onboard the aircraft- which the United States needs to protect- can probably be safely removed prior to any transfer of the aircraft. Along with security arrangements and end-user monitoring negotiated with Israel, this would protect US technology from being passed on to third parties such as China. With the F-117 in already in storage, a program to transfer the aircraft to the IDF could begin in short order. This would bridge the stealth gap for the IDF until the arrival of the first 25 stealthy multi-role F-35s sometime during the next decade. In fact, the F-117 aircraft might enable the IDF to purchase fewer F-35s while maintaining a significant stealthy long range strike capability. The transfer of the F-117s to Israel for a nominal cost would significantly bolster Israeli capabilities without the full purchase of the currently planned 75 F-35 JSF aircraft for the IDF- which may be too expensive for Israel with the level of customization requested by the IDF (if in fact such modifications are feasible). Even with the threats that surround Israel, a plane such as the F-22 Raptor is more capability for a much higher cost than is required by the IDF. More importantly, the F-22 was never built for export, it has none of the anti-tamper devices designed to protect sensitive American technologies built into its avionics from theft, duplication, or transfer to a third party- which is critical given the Israeli record on such matters. Installing such technologies to the Raptor would boost the F-22’s already high cost of 130+ million dollars per unit to somewhere in the realm of 250+ million dollars per plane and may not completely guarantee the security of the aircraft’s sensitive avionics. Additionally, while the Raptor has no equal in the air dominance role- it has rather limited air to ground capabilities even with the scheduled integration of the Increment 3.2 software package in 2011. The Raptor currently only has the capability to carry two internal 1000 lbs JDAMs. In the future however (around 2011), when it will be able to carry eight SDBs (Small Diameter Bomb) and include a SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) radar mapping capability, it will still be less capable in the strike role and have a shorter ranger than the F-35. Granted is the fact that the Raptor will be more survivable due to it’s much greater altitude and speed. Selling the Raptor to Israel would also send a very negative signal to America’s Arab allies in addition to the technology security issues highlighted earlier. Granted also is that transferring the F-117 will not win us any popularity contests either, but it would allow Israel to deal with Iran without direct US intervention. In short, America’s long standing policy towards Israel has been to guarantee that nations’ qualitative military edge over its largely hostile neighbours. This edge has recently been diminished by the proliferation of new and advanced weapons from the Russians, Europeans and the United States into the theatre. In order to restore the potential capabilities gap in long range strike in a high threat environment that is likely to develop in the area in the near future prior to the arrival of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the United States should supply surplus F-117 stealth aircraft to Israel.

From Examiner Should the F-117 stealth fighter be transferred to Israel? Part One: The Problem March 14, 9:06 PM Long standing US policy in the Middle East has been to assure the state of Israel that America would guarantee their military a qualitative edge compared to other regional powers- particularly relating to airpower. With the rising threat of Iran, Washington has been equipping other allies in the region with advanced armaments such as precision guided munitions and advanced warplanes. Often, these allies are not friendly to the Israelis, which causes unease in our only “Western” democratic ally in the area. Another major concern for Israel is the likely proliferation of advance integrated air defense systems (IADS) by Iran and Syria. With the acquisition of such weapons by these states, Israel’s ability to maintain air dominance over the battlefield will be threatened. While Syria’s air defenses are largely composed of older Soviet designs, the Syrians have long attempted to purchase the latest Russian systems with some success. Syria has reportedly purchased advanced Russian air search radars and at least a modest number of the advanced Russian point defense surface to air missile system known as the Tor-M1 (or SA-15 in NATO terminology). Syria has also attempted to purchase the long range and extremely potent SA-20 (also known as the S-300) surface to air missile system (SAM). Iran, likewise, has also attempted to purchase similar systems but on a much larger scale. These late generation SAMs- especially when operated as part of an integrated air defense system- pose a lethal threat to non-stealthy conventional aircraft which comprises not only the entire Israeli fleet, but also the bulk of the US arsenal. Indeed, both Israeli and US reports indicate that the SA-20 may already have been delivered to Iran-though the Russians deny these claims. In addition to the SAM threat, comes the danger from the proliferation of 4th generation fighters such as the Russian MiG-29 and Su-27 series and their derivatives around the world. These fighters are equal in most respects to current generation US built fighters such the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Fighting Falcon which comprise the bulk of the US and Israeli arsenal. In fact, certain versions of these advanced Russian built fighters are superior in one or more areas to US 4th generation fighters. Only the superior skills of Israeli and American pilots would prevent potential adversaries from gaining air superiority. However, superior training can take you only so far… Exercises have shown that the loss rate for friendly forces flying 4th generation fighters against late model Russian designs increases dramatically as the technological edge shifts in favour of a potential adversary. A few years ago, American pilots flying the F-15 Eagle air superiority fighters during exercises faced Indian pilots flying Su-30s, a derivative of the Su-27 series, and found themselves surprised and at a severe disadvantage against the powerful Russian built jets. Upgraded models of the Su-27 are now found worldwide, operated by even the most desperately poor Third World countries- such as Angola and Ethiopia. Advanced warplanes can be found even in the arsenals of countries such as Myanmar and Bangladesh, both of whom operate the formidable MiG-29 Fulcrum. Syria and Iran already operate the MiG-29 and there are reports of the two countries attempting to acquire even more advanced and powerful Su-27 derivatives such as the Su-30- advanced versions of which are operated by India and China. Venezuela operates a full squadron of advanced Su-30 fighters. More disturbingly, some recent reports have suggested that the Chinese have offered to sell their powerful new J-10 fighter to Iran. The J-10 is at least an equal to the US built F-16 and is probably closer in performance to the extremely potent European Typhoon fighter aircraft according to many analysts. If these reports prove to be correct, the Iranians would for the first time, possess a warplane capable of striking at Israel directly. The ultimate irony here being that the J-10 was developed by China with considerable technical assistance from Israel using technology developed for the now defunct Lavi project (which itself was based on the US F-16 fighter). Combined with an advanced integrated air defense system, these fighters pose a serious challenge, not only for the Israelis, but also for American airpower. The potential threat of an Iranian nuclear weapons program is another challenge faced by the Israelis. With the procurement of advanced integrated air defenses and modern fighters by Iran, Israel does not have the capability to strike with impunity against suspected nuclear sites in that country. The Israeli strike on the purported Syrian nuclear facility a couple of years ago was deceptive in its ease as the Syrian air defenses are not nearly as formidable as those of Iran. An additional factor was that the relative distances involved were quite short. Ultimately, Israeli success may have also had as much to do with Syrian ineptitude as it did with the military prowess of the IDF (Israel Defense Force). Another concern for the Israelis is that the relative qualitative edge that their military currently enjoys compared to their largely hostile neighbours is being eroded by an unlikely source- the United States. Keen to counter a rising Iran, the United States has approved the sale of advanced precision guided weapons such as the JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) to such Arab countries as Saudi Arabia. In fact some Arab countries operate equipment that is comparable or in some cases superior to aircraft operated by both Israeli forces and the United States military. The United Arab Emirates’ Block 60 F-16E/F is a prime example of an American built warplane that is superior to any version of that aircraft operated by either the US or Israel. Additionally, the recent Saudi purchase of the Eurofighter Typhoon is yet another example of an Arab qualitative advantage in terms of equipment. Of course, in terms of training, the IDF maintains a huge qualitative edge over any Arab state, however, training can only make up for so much of a performance deficit. Part Two continues tomorrow with a partial short term solution- depending, of course, upon your point of view.

From DefenseNews India Worried After Russia Grounds MiG-29s By vivek raghuvanshi Published: 18 Mar 18:21 EDT (22:21 GMT) NEW DELHI - Russia's decision to ground a large portion of its MiG-29 fighters is reverberating in India, where Defence Ministry sources say they are worried about the timely delivery of MiG-29K aircraft on order for the Navy and Air Force. Sources also say the grounding could hurt the chances for the derivative MiG-35 in India's $10 billion Combat Aircraft order. Indian Air Force (IAF) officials say they won't ground their 60 MiG-29s. The force is short of aircraft, fielding just 31 18-plane squadrons instead of the sanctioned 39.5 and desired 45 units. Russian Air Force officials grounded their 200 MiG-29s after two crashes last year. Many have been returned to flight, but 90 will remain out of action until they can be upgraded. The crashes may also affect talks, said to be near completion, between India and Russia for the purchase of more MiG-29Ks, ministry sources said. The Indian Navy ordered 16 in 2004 for $640 million. The MiG-35 is also competing for the IAF's $10 billion order of 126 combat aircraft against the Lockheed Martin F-16, Boeing Hornet, Dassault Rafael, EADS Eurofighter and Saab Gripen. A senior IAF official said the MiG-35 is structurally identical to the MiG-29 SMT, which includes advanced avionics, radar and enlarged dorsal spine for more fuel. But another IAF official said the MiG-35 is better than its predecessor and comparable to Eurofighter and the F-18. India was the first, and today remains the largest, foreign operator of the MiG-29. Part of the Russian sales pitch is that it ensures commonality with existing planes. Indian Defence Ministry sources said the grounding might hurt the MiG-35's chances, depending on what government holds power after India's May 16 general elections. Sharad Deshpande, a retired Indian Air Force air marshal, said, "The IAF should be in close contact with the Russian design and maintenance experts and would have obtained details of the structural defects/problems experienced by the Russian Air Force. Based on the inputs available, the IAF would have started a thorough inspection of their MiG-29 fleet and taken requisite remedial actions. Under no circumstances would they clear MiG-29 for flying if there is any question mark on its structural integrity and flight safety parameters." Defense analyst Mahindra Choudhary said the IAF and Navy should not buy the MiG-29 derivative, which may be increasingly hard to maintain.

From DefenseNews Deal Near on Sale of 14 Rafales to Libya By pierre tran Published: 19 Mar 11:04 EDT (15:04 GMT) PARIS - Commercial and technical negotiations on a sale of 14 French Rafale fighter jets to Libya have been largely completed, and politics will dictate the timing of any announcement of a deal, an industry executive said March 19. "The negotiations are done, more or less," the executive said. Asked when a deal would be announced, the executive said, "It's politics, it's always politics." Col. Muammar Khaddafi, the Libyan head of state, signed an agreement granting six months' exclusive negotiations for the Rafale when he visited Paris in December 2007. Human rights organizations criticized the visit by the Libyan leader and the prospective arms sales. The Rafales expected to be sold to Tripoli would be similar to the F3 standard entering service in the French Air Force, capable of aerial combat and ground strikes. The weapons package is being negotiated separately. MBDA, the European missile firm that supplies weapons for the Rafale, declined comment. France has yet to sell the Rafale to a foreign customer, although the aircraft is flying in a handful of competitions. "Negotiations are still going on with Libya," Jacques-Emmanuel Lajugie, the head of the international division of the Délégation Générale pour l'Armement (DGA), said March 17. The talks were lasting as long as expected, he said. The DGA is the French government's military procurement office. MBDA CEO Antoine Bouvier said separately March 17 that he expected a large export sale for missiles tied to the Rafale this year or next, as well as weapons for the FREMM frigate, a new warship being built for France and Italy. There are concerns that the economic crisis will hit defense spending in Brazil and Greece, where the Rafale is competing for orders, the industry executive said. Switzerland has completed a series of flight trials of the Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon and Sweden's Gripen as part of a tender to replace F-5 fighter jets. It is expected to take six months to evaluate the data from the tests. India also is looking to buy 126 new warplanes, but that competition is expected to take a long time, even by military procurement timetables, industry executives said. Dassault is looking for customers to buy the Mirage 2000-9 aircraft that the United Arab Emirates intends to replace with Rafales, Chief Executive Charles Edelstenne said March 19. A first delivery of the Rafale to the UAE would not be before 2012, and the UAE Air Force would probably need about three year's time to train aircrews on the new aircraft. "We have time to prospect," he said. DGA Chief Executive Laurent Collet-Billon said March 17 that the French Air Force would not be taking the Mirage 2000-9s from the UAE.

Added No.30.

From Aviation Week's ARES Blog Opening Doors - Silent Eagle on Video Posted by Graham Warwick at 3/18/2009 2:32 PM CDT As a coda to Bill and Amy's on-the-spot coverage of the Silent Eagle unveiling in St Louis on Mar. 17. here is a little Boeing video showing how AIM-120 AMRAAMs would be deployed from the internal bays in the conformal tanks. This is a working mockup - Amy tells me they would deploy much faster on the real aircraft. The weapon in the upper bay is attached to the outward-opening door and can be an AIM-120 or AIM-9-class missile, a 500lb JDAM or two 250lb Small Diameter Bombs. The weapon in the lower bay is attached to a trapeze launcher/ejector and can be an AIM-120, a 500lb or 1,000lb JDAM or two SDBs, according to Boeing.

From Defense Aerospace Russia Concedes Signing S-300 Missile Deal with Iran (Source: ddi Indian Government news; issued March 18, 2009) Russia on Wednesday conceded that it had signed a contract for the supply of highly potent S-300 air defence missiles to Iran two years ago, but said the actual deliveries were yet to commence depending on the "international situation". "Under the deal signed two years ago S-300 complexes have not been supplied so far to Iran. But the contract is being gradually implemented," a 'highly placed official' of the Federal Service for Military Technical Cooperation, supervising the foreign defence supplies, was quoted as saying by the news agency. "Further implementation of the contract to a great extent would depend on the international situation and the decision of the country's leadership," the Russian official said on the condition of anonymity. Both the US and Israel have been opposing transfer of the S-300 (SA-10, Grumble) air defence missile complexes capable of protecting key installations from massive air strikes including ballistic missiles, to Iran. Patriot class S-300 missile complexes capable of downing the ballistic warhead of the size of a tennis ball can simultaneously engage six targets to destroy them with a volley of 12 killer missiles. Russian S-300 would deprive the US and Israel impunity in case of air strikes on Iranian nuclear installations, suspected of developing nuclear weapons and in the peacetime its power radars could monitor each and every take-off and landing of US aircraft in the American airbases in Iraq and the Gulf, experts say. Military cooperation with Iran, including the plans to sell S-300 complexes, are elements of Moscow's trade-off in the relations with the West, according to the experts of a local defence think-tank. "S-300 contract and the whole cooperation with Iran are seen by Moscow only as an instrument in the political trading with the West and not as the means for realising Russia's fundamental defence and commercial interests," Ruslan Pukhov of the independent Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST) believes.

From Flight International DATE: 18/03/09 SOURCE: Flight International UK signs for first three F-35B Joint Strike Fighters By Craig Hoyle The UK has kept its commitment to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter programme despite massive pressure on its procurement budget, today signing for its first three production aircraft to support initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) of the fifth-generation fighter. Signed during a visit to Washington DC by defence secretary John Hutton, the deal will see the UK take delivery of its first short take-off and vertical landing F-35Bs in 2011, with the aircraft to be drawn from the JSF programme's third low-rate initial production batch. To be delivered in 2011-12, the UK aircraft will be assigned to a joint test team for the F-35 in the USA, with the Netherlands also expected to acquire two conventional take-off and landing F-35As to support IOT&E activities. Describing the JSF as "an essential part of our Future Combat Air Capability", Hutton says: "Working alongside their US colleagues, our pilots will gain an unrivalled understanding of this awesome aircraft and its capabilities." As the USA's lone Level 1 partner to the JSF programme, the UK expects to spend £2 billion ($2.79 billion) during the design's ongoing system development and demonstration phase. More than £1.1 billion of this total had been spent by 31 March 2008, according to the UK National Audit Office's Major Projects 2008 report. The MoD declines to reveal the value of its 18 March contract, citing "commercial sensitivity", but confirms that the sum is in addition to its previously identified £2 billion investment in the programme. To be acquired under its Joint Combat Aircraft project, the UK's future F-35Bs will replace its current BAE Systems Harrier GR7/9s, operated by the Royal Air Force/Royal Navy Joint Force Harrier organisation. Up to 138 of the aircraft are expected to be purchased. Up to 32 of the aircraft will be deployed aboard each of the RN's two 65,000t Future Aircraft Carrier vessels, and today's IOT&E acquisition "will enable the MoD to move forward in developing the Carrier Strike capability", Hutton says.

From Defense Aerospace Harriers - 40 Years Old and Still Jumping (Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued March 17, 2009) Few aircraft can be described as truly iconic, fewer still remain in service over long periods, but this year the British-designed Harrier celebrates its 40th birthday, having spent the past five years as a mainstay on operations in Afghanistan. And the Harrier really is unique - no other jet in service has its Vertical/Short Take-Off and Landing (V/STOL) capability where pilots can land on shortened runways, carrier decks or on landing pads in the middle of a forest. Developed during the Cold War, the Harrier has continually been developed from the first GR1 that came into service in 1969. Changes to the GR5 included larger wings that provided the ability to carry twice the amount of fuel and twice the payload. The cockpit has been designed around the pilot. The latest Harrier GR9 is a heavily updated development of the existing GR7, incorporating the ability to use a wide range of advanced precision weaponry, new communications, and systems and airframe upgrades. A Harrier can carry six Paveway IV bombs programmable by the pilot. Qualified Weapons Instructor Squadron Leader Dan Simmons is one of two RAF brothers flying Harriers. He is based at RAF Wittering with 20 (Reserve) Squadron where both the RAF and Royal Navy train for the Joint Harrier Force. Around 700 engineers and 20 pilots (from both Services) graduate each year. He said: "In heat of plus 45 degrees centigrade the Harrier can get airborne with a full war load and we do not have to reduce any of our capabilities. It's an amazing aircraft." Pilots are taught to land on 26 different types of landing surface at RAF Wittering, including a 'ski-ramp' that mimics the deck of an aircraft carrier. One student was combat-ready just two-and-a-half weeks after leaving his intensive ten-and-a-half month course. The Harrier's V/STOL capability was a massive benefit in the early days in Afghanistan and the short Kandahar airstrip. In a recent incident where a C-17 slid off the runway with its tail blocking the airstrip, Harriers were the only aircraft that could land and take-off for operations. But Harriers are soon to be withdrawn from Afghanistan and replaced by Tornado GR4s. And in ten years they will be withdrawn completely from service and replaced by the Joint Combat Aircraft. Co-operation between both Harrier and Tornado squadrons preparing for the transition is already well-advanced. However, it is still far too early to consign the iconic Harrier to a museum. Officer Commanding 20 (Reserve) Squadron, Wing Commander Lincoln Taylor, said: "The Harrier Force has been on operations around the world give or take for the last 15 years. The aircraft remains relevant in today's ops as it did 40 years ago because of its V/STOL capability." To mark the Harrier's anniversary two days of celebrations have been planned for Thursday 23 and Friday 24 July at RAF Wittering and RAF Cottesmore that will include a black tie gala dinner for all those who have served, maintained or flown Harriers since 1969.

From Defense Aerospace Iranian Influence, Terrorist Links, Threaten Latin American Security (Source: US Department of Defense; issued March 17, 2009) WASHINGTON --- Iran is increasing its presence in Latin America, and Hezbollah, a terrorist organization it sponsors, is making inroads in drug trafficking in Colombia, the commander of U.S. Southern Command told Congress today. Navy Adm. James G. Stavridis told the House Armed Services Committee he shares concerns expressed by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates about Iranian activity in Central and South America. Iran has opened six embassies in the region during the past five years and is promoting Islamic activities in the region. “That is of concern, principally because of the connection between the government of Iran, which is a state sponsor of terrorism, and Hezbollah,” Stavridis said today. “We see a great deal of Hezbollah activity throughout South America, in particular.” Much of that activity takes place in the tri-border area of Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina, and in the Caribbean. Stavridis noted in his written statement that Southcom supported a Drug Enforcement Administration operation in the tri-border area last August that targeted a Hezbollah-connected drug trafficking organization. Two months later, Southcom supported another interagency operation in which several dozen people were arrested in Colombia for ties to a Hezbollah-connected drug trafficking and money laundering ring. Despite big successes in professionalizing the Colombian military and helping it deal with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, Southcom has witnessed a direct connection there between Hezbollah and drug trafficking in Colombia, Stavridis told the committee. He noted the direct link between the illicit drug trade and the terrorist groups it bankrolls, noting the threat posed by Islamic radical terrorism. “Indentifying, monitoring and dismantling the financial, logistical and communication linkages between illicit trafficking groups and terrorist sponsors are critical to not only ensuring early indications and warnings of potential terrorist attacks directed at the United States and our partners, but also in generating a global appreciation and acceptance of this tremendous threat to security,” he said. Stavridis called Colombia – the major global source of cocaine and home of the FARC – pivotal in the fight to stop illicit traffickers at the source. Continued support to Colombia to help it in this endeavor will pay big dividends for the region and for the United States, he said. “Providing resources and investments to improve the Colombian military, along with enhancing our interagency capabilities, will build the capacity to integrate and share information with U.S. and international counter-narcotic organizations,” he said. “Our interagency support efforts will directly improve regional and hemispheric security.” (ends) US Military Commander Warns of Iran-Hezbollah Influence in Latin America (Source: Voice of America news; issued March 17, 2009) WASHINGTON --- The commander of U.S. forces in Latin America says the Iranian-backed Lebanese militant group Hezbollah is involved in drug trafficking in Colombia. The admiral is worried about increased Iranian and Hezbollah activities throughout the region. At Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Tuesday Admiral James Stavridis accused Hezbollah of involvement in the drug trade. "We have seen in Colombia a direct connection between Hezbollah activity and the narco-trafficking activity," he said. The admiral's comment came in response to a question from a senator seeking more information about concerns first raised by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates before the same committee in January. The secretary accused Iran of engaging in what he called "subversive" activity in several places in Latin America. He called newly-opened Iranian offices in Central and South America "fronts" for interfering in local affairs. Admiral Stavridis, who heads U.S. Southern Command, noted what he called "an increase in a wide level of activity by the Iranian government," including the opening of six new embassies in Latin America during the last five years, and what he called "proselytizing and working with Islamic activities throughout the region." "That is of concern principally because of the connections between the government of Iran, which is a state sponsor of terrorism, and Hezbollah," he said. "We see a great deal of Hezbollah activity throughout South America, in particular. [The] tri-border of Brazil is a particular concern, as in Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina, as well as [other] parts of Brazil and in the Caribbean Basin." Admiral Stavridis said the United States has good cooperation with the tri-border countries and that it receives what he called a "reasonable level" of information about what goes on there. But, he said, there are no U.S. military personnel in the area. The admiral also spoke about Venezuela during his testimony. He said the United States does not have a good understanding of what the government of President Hugo Chavez intends to do with his growing military and strong relationship with Russia. But Stavridis said reduced revenues from the fall in the price of oil will affect Venezuela's ability to continue its high level of arms purchases from Russia, and to maintain and operate its new, expensive weapons systems.

From Aviation Week's ARES Blog Silent Eagle - The Technoid View Posted by Bill Sweetman at 3/17/2009 12:14 PM CDT Last September, an eight-engineer group at Boeing set out to see what could be done to make the F-15 Strike Eagle more stealthy. The result, unveiled today in the form of mock-up components attached to the F-15E-1 test airframe, is Silent Eagle. Late this year or early in 2010, the same aircraft should be flight-testing the new configuration, including at least one weapon release. The team has desiged internal weapon bay units that have the same aerodynamic shape and aircraft interfaces as the conformal fuel tanks (CFTs) of the F-15E and its export derivatives. The bays can be swapped for the standard CFTs on the flightline. Each side bay has two doors and two weapon mounts, The upper, side-opening door carries a rail launcher for an AIM-120 AMRAAM or an AIM-9-type missile, or a launcher for a single 500 lb bomb. The lower door accommodates a trapeze-plus-ejector mount for an AIM-120, a single 500-lb or 1,000-lb bomb or two Small Diameter Bombs. The other principal change to the Silent Eagle is the adoption of a small outward cant to the vertical tails, which not only reduces side-on RCS to some degree but also, with the aid of a little toe angle, generates a small amount of lift and improves the fighter's trim, eliminating nose ballast. Lastly, the Eagle gets an extensive radar absorbent material (RAM) treatment, including a frangible cover on the gun muzzle. The overall goal, however, is to minimize both changes and the use of exotic technology. For now, the Silent Eagle is aimed primarily at two markets. One is Japan's F-X requirement. The other is international customers who already fly advanced F-15E derivatives, including Singapore, Israel (both of them notionally JSF customers) Korea and Saudi Arabia. So the idea is to use off-the-shelf, exportable RAM, to carry out the program as an international venture and make the modifications retrofittable. The concept is to give the operator a choice between a reduced-RCS configuration and the standard heavy-payload Strike Eagle load-out. The "slick" version would carry internal weapons and no external tanks. Boeing says that the aircraft loses most of the 1500 US gal of fuel in the CFTs, but that other changes - some fuel in the new CFTs and a more compact EW suite from BAE Systems - restore some 550 US gal. With other offsetting advantages - for example, the "slick" aircraft can take off with partial afterburner - the fuel fraction should be enough to provide a reasonable range. Also, the CFTs are cleared for the full envelope of the aircraft, including speeds above Mach 2 - a capability that's been demonstrated in tests of Singapore's new F-15SG. A bar-napkin performance comparison of the F-35 with the Silent Eagle makes interesting reading. The Eagle is a bigger aircraft, with two seats, two engines and almost one-third more wing, and its operating empty weight is 25 per cent greater than the F-35. Clean, the F-35's fuel fraction of 0.375 is better than the Silent Eagle's 0.32. On the other hand, in clean configuration, the Silent Eagle is faster than the F-35, has a lower wing loading and higher thrust/weight ratio (almost 1:1 at its 58,000-pound estimated clean take-off weight, with the latest engines from P&W and GE). It carries the same number of AAMs (until someone figures out a six-AAM arrangement for the F-35) and has an internal rail-launch option for the AIM-9X, permitting lock-on before launch. However, Boeing says that they're not competing with the JSF - and that it was mere coincidence that the design started just as the Israelis started seeing the real price of the F-35A.