CV32

Amateurs talk tactics, professionals study logistics.

I know that some, perhaps many, of you HCE players out there must have played with the Scenario Editor and perhaps built scenarios of your own. I'll get to the point: why aren't you sharing them? Scenarios are the lifeblood of this game, folks. Without scenarios to play, enjoy and share, we're toiling away at improving this game for what? If you're worried about 'quality', please don't be. There's no one around here that is going to wag their finger and say your scenario doesn't meet their own self-conceived standards. And, if your scenario could use improvement, or you'd like help to make it better in some way, there are plenty of folks who would be glad to assist. HarpGamer is going to launch a bit of a formal initiative shortly to fuel some movement on this topic, but I'd like to get a headstart on that effort. So, scenario writers, where are you?

What looks to be a useful site for World War Two order of battle (OOB) and organization info, gleaned from the Admiralty Trilogy mailing list: http://niehorster.orbat.com/000_admin/000oob.htm

From Flight International DATE: 08/07/08 SOURCE: Flight International EA-18G “Growler”: New platform and capabilities set to un-level the SEAD playing field By John Croft If the battlefield were an American football field, the US Navy's venerable but well-worn Northrop Grumman EA-6B Prowler might be thought of as an offensive lineman clearing the path for a running back carrying the ball. In this case, the Prowler's goal would be the suppression of enemy air defences (SEAD) from a stand-off position using on-board electronic jammers to disrupt radar and communications, clearing the way for the navy, marines or air force strike forces to do their jobs. The Prowler generally carries two AGM-88 high-speed anti-radiation missiles (HARM) to use against radar sites if needed. Given that the navy's fleet of Prowlers is set to be retired in the 2013 timeframe because of airframe life limits, the military has a unique opportunity to grow significantly the role of the "lineman" that will replace the Prowler. Enhanced Functions That replacement is the $60 million EA-18G "Growler", a platform with enhanced SEAD capabilities, self-protection and networking abilities that will allow it take on command and control functions as well as SEAD. Using the football analogy, the Growler is poised in the future to become both lineman and quarterback on the navy's playing field. Operational evaluation of the Growler is to begin shortly, with initial operations capability (IOC) set for September 2009 after the VAQ-132 carrier squadron, the first of 10 navy aircraft carrier squadrons to transition to the Growler, receives its contingent of five aircraft. So far, prime contractor Boeing Integrated Defense Systems has delivered one aircraft (the fourth production unit) on 3 June to the Fleet Readiness Squadron (VAQ-129) for training, with three earlier production units and two engineering models remaining in the test programme at the Naval Air Warfare Center's Patuxent River, Maryland and China Lake, California sites. Boeing says the first three production aircraft (G1, G2 and G3) may later be delivered to the fleet. The $1.2 billion development programme, started in December 2003, is to conclude in mid- to late next year. The navy "programme of record" calls for Boeing to deliver 85 Block 1 aircraft with Northrop Grumman-provided airborne electronic attack (AEA) systems up to fiscal year 2013 12 for VAQ-129 and five for each of the 10 carrier squadrons, plus spares. The marines plan to use the existing Prowlers for a longer period, while the air force is investigating the potential for using B-52H bombers with pods for stand-off jamming. Based on the $54 million Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet and its twin General Electric F414-GE-400 turbojet engines, the two-seat EA-18G will have a maximum cruise speed of Mach 0.95 (with wing pods attached), up 10% from the Prowler's maximum speed of M0.86. While carrying the same AGM-88 missiles, ALQ-99 low- and high-band tactical jamming pods and multi-mission advanced tactical terminal (MATT) satellite communications gear as the most advanced Prowler (ICAP-III), the Growler will have the ability to protect itself with two AIM-120C medium-range air-to-air missiles, freeing other aircraft from performing that role. The Growler will carry the ALQ-227(v)1, a new digital version of the EA-6B's USQ-113 communications countermeasures set (CCS) that is better able to locate enemy communication channels and disrupt communications over a wider set of frequencies through the ALQ-99 low-band jammer pod. Receiver System The EA-18G also has a more compact version of the Prowler's ALQ-218 RF receiver system (sensors carried on top of the tail of the Prowler and on the wingtips of the Growler), that when combined with the long baseline interferometer (LBI) antennas located fore and aft of the aircraft, geo-locates radar locations and provides selective reactive jamming capability. The Growler carries the electronics for the ALQ-218(v)2 receiver system in its nose compartment in place of the Super Hornet's M61A1 20mm Vulcan cannon. All new for the EA-18G is an interference cancellation system (INCANS) that allows the aircraft to maintain UHF communications while jamming, a capability unavailable on the Prowler. The Growler also has the F/A-18's APG-79 active electronically steered array (AESA) radar, allowing for aircrews to track multiple targets simultaneously, as well as the Super Hornet's joint helmet-mounted cueing system (JHMCS), which lets pilots fire missiles simply by looking at a target, and multi-information distribution system (Link 16), which increases battlefield situational awareness. Mike Gibbons, Boeing EA-18G programme manager, says the pivotal technology on the aircraft is a new software package called the data-correlation mechanism that automatically correlates streams of data generated by all of the Growler's on-board sensors, including the APG-79, ICAP-III receivers and AGM-88E high-speed anti-radiation missile. Variable Configuration Although the "normal" carry for the Growler will be three jamming pods, two AIM-120Cs, two AGM-88s and two external fuel tanks that allow the aircraft to carry an extra 2,950kg (6,500lb) of fuel, or more than 9,070kg in total, the aircraft can be configured for as many as five pods or four AGM-88s. A host of other options are available, including clean-wing arrangements that allow the aircraft to fly with no speed restrictions. Power for the ALQ-218, MATT and CCS is provided by the aircraft while the ALQ-99 jammers use ram-air turbines attached to the front of the pods. In total, the new and improved features appear to be successful in creating, as designed, a command and control holism that will be greater than the sum of the parts. While the results of an early June navy-led multi-force exercise that included four Growlers (two modified Super Hornets and two production aircraft) are classified, Gibbons says officials are "extremely excited" about the outcome. The Growlers were used in ways that there were "no chance" of the EA-6B being used, Gibbons says. The navy's long-range plans promise more to come. "There are quite a few growth and development items waiting in the queue for study," says Gibbons. In the near term are plans to replace the MATT due to the "obsolescence of the network it was connected to" in the 2012 timeframe, says Gibbons. In addition to the change in network, Gibbons says the new system, now in a feasibility study phase by the navy, will have increased reliability and require less maintenance. "Back-up batteries have been a real nuisance," he adds. Also envisaged by the navy in the near future are options to carry the same weaponry as the Super Hornet, including laser-guided bombs. Gibbons says the Growler will be the lead platform for the 2010 test and 2012 fielding of the next generation HARM missile (AARGM), which will have multiple guidance modes to target radar sites that shut down to foil traditional HARM missiles. Gibbons says the EA-18G will also be the primary platform for the navy's next-generation ALQ-99 jammer, a device that is likely to be fielded in the 2018 timeframe. In addition to carrying the new system, the navy is keen to "extend the mission" of the Growler. Gibbons says studies are under way to look at using the Growler as a "localised command and control vehicle" that would have access not only to next generation jamming pods being flown on other aircraft, but also of unmanned air vehicles and other assets in the force. From a human factors standpoint, Boeing planned well in advance for the Growler with just one pilot and one weapons system officer to outperform the Prowler's three electronic counter measures officers (ECMO). The company in 1997 began testing EA-6B pilots and ECMOs in a purpose-built simulator in St Louis, ultimately weighing input from 500 crewmembers when developing early on the EA-18G crew interface software, which allows the crew to share information and tasks. Crew Training Crews will learn how to co-ordinate their actions at the navy's fleet readiness squadron (VAQ-129) at NAS Whidbey Island, Washington, using three tactical operational simulators built by Boeing and L-3. The navy plans to offer basic pilot front seat training using the Super Hornet at existing training sites and "difference training" at Whidbey for Growler-specific missions using the seven-screen simulators, the first of which earned its "ready for training" status on 23 June. The navy is contemplating a fourth simulator to support a Growler roll-out schedule that calls for three more deliveries this year, 11 next year and as many as 22 a year by 2011. Boeing assembles the wings, forward fuselage and performs the final assembly of all F/A-18s in two plants in St Louis. The rear fuselage is built by Northrop in El Segundo. While the ALQ-99 jamming pods are integrated at the navy's Whidbey Island facility, Boeing installs the ALQ-218 wingtip pods in St Louis, attaching the devices to the same two attach points that hold the AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles on the Super Hornet. Total build time for the Grower is 18 months, says Boeing. Aircraft Funding The navy to date has funded the first 56 aircraft, although Boeing expects a contract for the remaining 29 aircraft in the programme of record next year. Boeing says a fleet of 85 Growlers leaves a gap for one reserve squadron and three expeditionary squadrons that now use the Prowler and will decommission the aircraft in 2012. At Boeing's St Louis plant, the production process for the Growler is virtually indistinguishable from that of the Super Hornet. Many of the internal changes required to route 1.6km (1 mile) of cabling - including 318 RF cables - connecting various SEAD systems have been retrofitted into the Super Hornet line to maintain commonality. Also in common with the F/A-18F are forward fuel tank pass-through modifications needed to route cabling from the Growler's electronic bays in the nose to its components in the wings and tail. By 1 May, Boeing had delivered 197 F/A-18Fs and 157 F/A-18Es (single-seat) to 19 navy squadrons and nine aircraft carrier wings. As the Growler and Super Hornet have more than 90% commonality in terms of parts, economy at scale will reduce operational costs. Like the Super Hornet, Growlers will be covered by Boeing's integrated logistics support for the first year, followed by a Boeing's F/A-18E/F integrated readiness support teaming, a performance-based logistic programme in which the navy pays Boeing to provide a set level of readiness for the Super Hornet fleet. According to Boeing, the navy increased the F/A-18E/F mission capable rate from 57% in 2001 to 73% in 2006 by taking part in the logistic programme. Externally, there are numerous change that are Growler-unique, some more subtle than others. Most noticeable are changes to outer portions of the Growler's wing, put in place partially because of "the buffet onset at high-g manoeuvres" experienced with Super Hornets, says Boeing. As part of a Super Hornet transonic flying qualities programme launched before the advent of the Growler, four design changes were developed by engineers at Boeing. When the navy decided to launch the Growler, Boeing offered to include the improvements, in part to minimise motion of the wingtip pods to better locate threats. "We wanted to make the manoeuvres smoother for the [Growler]," says Tony Bargeon, Boeing's EA-18G configuration manager. "We wanted to make the wingtips quieter too." Leading edge fairings now form a smooth "saw tooth" transition from the outer wing (the outer section that folds up and over for carrier operations) to the inner wing, replacing "snag" edge between the two on the Super Hornet. A 12.5cm (5in)-high by 150cm-long wing fence has been placed on the top surface of each wing about midway along the span, and there are now aileron "tripper strips" just ahead of the aileron hinge line. The two-strip arrangement forms a triangle rough 0.95cm high, eliminating the "aileron buzz" experienced by Super Hornet pilots during the same high-g manoeuvres. Engineers also replaced the perforated hinge fairing between outer and inner wing with a solid hinge fairing to help with the buffeting. Boeing EA-18G chief engineer Kevin Fogarty says Boeing offered to make the same changes on the Super Hornet production line, but the navy declined. The RF receiver pods mounted on the wingtips for the ALQ-218 system were designed to maintain the weight, moment of inertia and control feel as the AIM-9 missiles they replace. Engineers originally had placed four fins around the circumference of each pod at the front and back (eight in total) to "improve lift at lower airspeed", says Bargeon, but officials later decided to remove all lower fins after tests showed little value in placing the fins there. In addition to a new 33cm blade antenna for the communications countermeasures set on the dorsal, the Growler has eight LBI antennas, also known as "bug eyes" at the front and back of the fuselage. One antenna is just ahead of the aircraft's angle-of-attack sensor, causing oscillations in its measurements, an issue engineers solved through software filtering in the flight-control computer. Wingtip pods each contain 28 antenna elements. Flight Tests Fogarty says the more than 350 navy flight tests did not uncover any aeromechanical issues with the Growler. "The main objective was to validate that nothing was impacted by the changes," he says. Those changes included not only the SEAD pods, but modified flight-control gains based on the new external configuration with the pods. Boeing first simulated the changes before live testing. Along with the M0.95 speed limit when carrying the with the under-wing pods, Fogarty says there are also roll and pull-up limits. Problematic from an electronics standpoint were unanticipated temperature changes on the cabling connecting the Growler's ALQ-218 wingtip pods affecting the phase of the signals being sent to the internal electronics in the fuselage. The shifts caused an out-of-tolerance phase condition during testing, affecting system performance, says Fogarty. The solution - duplicating the problem in the laboratory and installing different cable from the same vendor - solved the problem. As of mid-June, Boeing was testing the final software for the Growler, expecting to be finished by mid- to late July in time for a test readiness review, a necessary hurdle before operational evaluation testing in August. Also on tap for this summer are the EA-18G's first carrier trials, set to take place on an unnamed carrier at an undisclosed time.

Blasphemy!

An excellent 'detailed analysis' of the Soviet/Russian S-300P SAM system by Sean O'Connor can be found at his (also excellent) IMINT & Analysis Blog site here: http://geimint.blogspot.com/

Well, in all fairness to the Growler, there is a bit more to it than that, T.

Expanded No.15.

Flight International, 4 July Avro Vulcan lands at RAF Waddington

From Flight International DATE: 07/07/08 SOURCE: Flight International Air Force prepares to restart B-52 jammer programme By Marcus Weisgerber The US Air Force is expected to take a significant step forward this month as it attempts to revive an effort to field an airborne electronic attack aircraft in the next decade. Requirements officials have quietly constructed a funding plan within the air force's internal six-year spending plan that would allow the service to begin testing high-tech electronic warfare components that could one day be installed on a portion of the Boeing B-52 bomber fleet. If the core component jammer (CCJ) wins approval from senior USAF leaders in the programme objective memorandum and then eventually gets congressional backing, a demonstration of the technology could take place by fiscal year 2012, says Col Bob Schwarze, the air force's chief of EW and cyber warfare requirements. Also this month, the air force is expected to award several contracts for separate EW technology maturation research and development work, which will be directly applied to the jammer programme. "We are looking at trying to get back into the stand-off jamming business with airborne electronic attack," says Schwarze. Air force EW officials have rescoped the CCJ programme, bringing it more into line with five-year-old plans to equip the venerable Stratofortress bomber with a stand-off jamming capability. Stand-off jamming is aimed at the enemy's low-band, early-warning radars. It enables attack jets and other aircraft to enter that airspace undetected and take out surface-to-air missiles sites and other threats. Adding highly advanced EW capabilities to the bomber would enhance the air force's initial strike package at the onset of conflict. Theatre Air Campaign If equipped with the stand-off jamming capability, the EB-52 would be integrated into a theatre air campaign along with other first-strike aircraft, such as the stealthy fifth-generation Lockheed Martin F-22A Raptor. EW capability would enable the Stratofortress to launch kinetic strikes with cruise missiles or GPS-guided smart bombs while engaging in offensive airborne electronic attack. The distance at which the EB-52 would be able to kill an enemy's radar systems is classified, but both the original stand-off jammer and CCJ ranges are the same, according to USAF EW officials. An EW officer would control the wingtip-mounted sensors from inside the EB-52 and the bomber would not lose any weapons-carrying capability if the jamming instruments were installed. Nevertheless, in an attempt to lower the programme's price tag, the USAF plans to equip only a portion of its Stratofortress fleet. The previous effort called for rewiring most of the active B-52s to operate the jamming pods, while buying enough pods to equip a small fraction of the fleet. Similarly, the exact number of bombers to receive CCJ modifications has not yet been determined, say EW officials. The CCJ will have a "more tailored" frequency range than the original design and will specifically target low-band acquisition radars. The air force's original stand-off jammer could target a broader range of threats, too, say officials. The receiver capability on the CCJ will also be tweaked. The air force began flying nuclear-attack-capable B-52s in 1952. In recent years, the USAF has begun retiring the oldest versions of the bomber, but more than 70 1960s-era H-model aircraft remain in its active inventory and played major roles at the onset of US combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The legacy aircraft has been equipped with 21st century technology and has evolved from dropping so-called "dumb bombs" to deploying precision-guided smart munitions. The massive aircraft have even been outfitted with the same advanced targeting pods used on Boeing F-15E Strike Eagles and Lockheed Martin F-16 Falcons. In the past few months, there has been talk of US Strategic Command operating a B-52 rotation nuclear squadron. But the EW system on the Buff - as the bomber is called - is so dated, some parts still contain vacuum tubes. Despite this, the aircraft is projected to be structurally sound until 2040, according to industry officials. A 1999 USAF study said an airborne electronic attack "system of systems" would be needed to augment and eventually replace the US Navy's and US Marine Corps' EA-6B Prowler aircraft. The overall concept envisaged the B-52 operating in the stand-off jamming role and performing a battle management function. The escort jamming role would be taken by the navy's Boeing EA-18G Growlers. Meanwhile, stealthy aircraft, such as Lockheed's F-22 and F-35 fighters equipped with active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars, would perform the "stand-in jamming" role. Officials first mentioned the B-52 stand-off jammer as the centre of the EW strike package in June 2002. Almost two years later, in April 2004, the USAF submitted its "system of systems" transition plan to Congress, which led to a capabilities-based assessment and the eventual approval of the US Department of Defense's Joint Requirements Oversight Council in November of that year. But in December 2005, the outgoing USAF chief of staff, Gen T Michael Moseley, scrapped the service's previous attempt to field an AEA aircraft because its price tag was approaching $7 billion due to a plethora of requirements piled onto the original plans. The CCJ concept was officially reborn almost eight months later, in July 2006. But the delay in fielding a new platform means the air force and navy face a gap in airborne electronic-jamming capability between 2012 and 2015 - a mission now performed by the EA-6B. Meanwhile, the USAF aims to overcome the capability gap risk by using the self-protection systems on legacy jets - such as F-15s and F-16s - and through other assets, including jamming versions of the Raytheon-built miniature air-launched decoy. These MALD-Js are one piece of the system-of-systems concept. Schwarze says this will shrink the 2012 capabilities gap, adding: "It will not eliminate it, we know that. That's why we're trying to do these other things." Those other things include upgrades to legacy aircraft electronic warfare systems. The navy plans to replace its Prowlers - now operated by the USAF in Afghanistan - with the EA-18G Growler, a variant of the Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet, but the air force has no plans to buy those advanced jets. Ever since the stand-off jammer programme was cancelled, talk of giving the B-52 an airborne electronic attack capability remained a hot topic among USAF top brass. The characteristics and size of the B-52 make it an attractive platform to fill the service's future stand-off jamming void, said Air Combat Command chief Gen John Corley in March. Value and Merit Corley says the B-52 is potentially a platform that has "value and merit" because of its large size, high power supply, amount of space and cooling capabilities. Schwarze echoes Corley's view, noting that much of the infrastructure is already in place to support a jamming version of the B-52. But this time around, the USAF will scale down the B-52 jammer effort significantly from the "mission creep" that scuppered the previous effort. The CCJ programme will be much smaller and along the lines of the original stand-off jammer requirements at a fraction of the cost, says Schwarze. "In today's fiscally constrained environment, it's really tough to sign on to a couple-of-billion-dollar programme." The B-52 jammer upgrade is just one of many air force EW modernisation projects. Last year the USAF stood up a new management group to oversee all its aircraft EW upgrades while trying to streamline the upgrade process between different programme offices to keep costs down. Initially, it is focusing on fixing the radar warning receiver on A-10 attack jets and jamming pods on F-16 fighters, "because they're stuck in the analogue world," says Schwarze. The radar warning receivers in the A-10 Warthog are crystal-based, using similar technology to radios built in the 1930s, Schwarze points out. Most air force EW systems on legacy aircraft house a 286 microchip processor, the same as that used in personal computers built in the mid-1980s. The air force first fielded digital RF memory-jammer technology in F-15C fighters in 1987, says Schwarze. The component worked well then, but is now obsolete against current surface-to-air missile threats. Top USAF generals came up with the EW group idea after a series of meetings last year. Officials plan to digitise the A-10's radar warning receiver and remove the crystals, says Schwarze. They will then attempt to migrate the new technology to other aircraft. But apart from some "breadboards" at the Air Force Research Laboratory, most of the CCJ concept remains solely on paper and no components have been flown or tested on a range. Officials envisage the wing pod being about 12m (40ft) long and weighing 2,270kg (5,000lb), similar to external fuel tanks. "We are looking at the technical maturation of that type of capability," says Schwarze. Officials are now working on several aspects of this under initiatives funded in this year's defence budget. One of these includes the use of active electronically steered arrays. The service plans to continue its AEA-related development in 2009 and air force officials have requested just over $34 million in research and development for the CCJ effort. Congress has yet to approve the Pentagon's budget, however. Among the efforts under way is the development of four separate "critical technologies" that will play a key role in giving the B-52 a stand-off jamming capability. These include low-band, high-power transmitting phased arrays, mid-band high-power transmitting phased arrays, advanced exciters and aircraft integration systems engineering. If the demonstrations built by multiple contractors are successful, follow-on acquisition contracts to build flightworthy jamming pods are expected. Although the B-52 CCJ is the expected future transition platform for these demonstrators, the technology would also be applicable to other potential AEA system-of-systems platforms, including the EC-130H Compass Call and the EA-18G. The air force also plans to initiate several engineering studies to explore installing such systems on the B-52, including the jamming pods themselves. "We have to crawl before we walk," says one air force EW programme official. "We have to prove this technology is viable, doable - and that's what we're working on." Programme's Fate After an expected FY2012 demonstration, air force leaders must then decide the programme's fate. A platform could be fielded as early as 2015 or 2016, says Schwarze. Both the USA's Northrop Grumman and UK defence giant BAE Systems are expected to compete for the eventual contract to equip a fleet of Stratofortress bombers with electronic attack capability. Last year, Northrop and B-52 integrator Boeing formed a pact to compete together for the anticipated CCJ contract. At that time, the team presented what it called a "back to basics" version of the original stand-off jammer. Since then, the pair have been working closely with air force EW officials, says Scot Oathout, Boeing's director of B-52 programmes. The team has submitted proposals for several technology maturation contracts, which industry officials expect to last about three years. Boeing CCJ officials tout their version of the EB-52 as an affordable "great basic stand-off jamming capability". BAE has not decided whether to compete. In late May, Northrop said it had demonstrated - through an AFRL-funded study - that airborne electronic jammer aircraft were more effective and efficient when networked and enhanced by decision aids. Researchers at Northrop Grumman's Bethpage, New York facility - the same Long Island plant that built most of the navy's F-14 fighters - first demonstrated that networking AEA jammers give war fighters more tactical options and flexibility than independently functioning electronic attack aircraft. Then, by adding decision aids to the jammers, the systems were found to be three to five times more effective than standalone jammers. The study appears to validate the objectives of the 2005-cancelled Joint Unmanned Combat Air System programme, which was a joint air force and navy effort. The 2005 Quadrennial Defence Review - a Pentagon requirements document updated every five years - directed the air force to terminate work on its portion of that programme and begin developing a new long-range bomber, which the service wants to field by 2018. A final decision on whether the air force receives approval to allocate the funding in its internal spending plan is expected later this year. But funding levels and requirements could change when a new US president takes up office in January 2009.

I'm not the coder but I imagine it could be done. The problem, however, is that it introduces a way to readily defeat the AI. I would readily agree that if an aircraft dives below the SA-5's engagement envelope, it should properly and realistically survive. Until you also take note that changing altitude in HCE is as simple as a mouse click. Its just too easy to do right now. We are (and have to be) very careful that by making changes and 'improvements' to the code, we don't inadvertently cause other problems/limitations with the game. HCE works, and works very well. We want to keep it that way. I'm not shutting the door on your suggestion, but just noting that there are many other considerations to be made. ASW torpedoes will attack surfaced submarines but they don't dive below their maximum operating depths. A submarine capable of Vdeep can therefore escape many earlier generation lightweight torpedoes.

Correct. The altitude parameters for SAMs are for weapon launch only. Haven't confirmed it in a while, but I'm pretty sure that SARH guided naval SAMs do not self-destruct, nor do they go stupid if their launching ship has its radars knocked or gets itself sunk. HC was the first Harpoon version to fully emulate Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC). They don't lose guidance in HCE, as I guess you've noticed. Keep in mind that the 'link' between radars and radar guided weapons is modeled very loosely. Even on the anti-radar side, you'll also notice that shutting down the radars does not provide any protection against anti-radar weapons already in the air. Glad to hear it. If you keep in mind that the HCE code/model is overall a relatively simple one, and that its now a far sight better than it has ever been, you'll probably stay a happy Harpooner.

Yes, have a good one!

The altitude limits are working but the code only links radar and SAM guidance in a rudimentary way. You cannot break radar lock and cause a SAM to go ballistic by going below radar horizon. As long as you are still inside the altitude envelope of the missile (i.e. between its minimum and maximum altitudes), you can still be shot down.

Nice job pasting that control tower. I think its safe to say that's a mission kill. The MiGs on the hardstand are parked pretty close together, with no revetments. I'd venture to say any bomb falling among them (excepting No.6 furthest to the north) is going to have moderate to severe damaging effects on neighboring jets, not just from blast but from flying debris, pieces of concrete, etc, etc. I'd also hazard the guess that as these MiGs on the hardstand do not appear to be pulling QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) duty, they're probably unfueled, so no added benefit from exploding fuel. My 'storyline' addition: MiG-21 No.1 (furthest to the south on the hardstand) gets demolished by the flying APU/starter trolley (looks like this might be the object sited between No.1 and No.2) as the bomb explodes on No.2 MiG-21 No.4 is moderately to severely damaged in the course of being bracketed by exploding bombs on Nos.3 and 5. MiG-21 No.6 is potentially lightly damaged by blast and/or flying debris, and if so, probably repairable. Die roll?

Seems JSF has a 'stranglehold' on the next Dutch fighter contract? From Aviation Week's ARES Blog Eurofighter, Rafale Refuse to Play in New Dutch Evaluation Posted by Joris Janssen Lok at 7/4/2008 2:39 AM CDT The Netherlands is launching another evaluation of potential alternatives to the Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) -- but the companies behind two of them (Eurofighter and Dassault Aviation) have turned down the Dutch request to provide updated information on their Typhoon Batch 3 and Rafale F4, respectively. Dutch state secretary for defense procurement Jack de Vries has told Parliament, one day before it departed for its two-month summer recess, that he "hopes to visit the manufacturers of the Eurofighter and the Rafale in the near future to convince them of the importance of an updated contribution to the new evaluation." The Dutch embarked on a course to become full partners in the development of the F-35 as early as 1996-97, and selected the F-35A as the "best aircraft for the best price" after a brief evaluation of other potential F-16 replacement fighters in 2001-2002. Recently, however, there has been growing concern, particularly among left-wing and populist parties in the Dutch Parliament, about JSF cost overruns. In May, the Parliament called for a new evaluation as part of a compromise that enabled the defense ministry to proceed with a plan to order its first two F-35A aircraft for participation in the F-35 Initial Operational Test& Evaluation that starts in 2011. Late last week, de Vries already told Parliament that he refuses to include Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Lockheed Martin's F-22A Raptor in the new evaluation, even though Parliament had directly asked him to do so (see stories published on AviationWeek.com and in the July 2 issue of Aerospace Daily & Defense Report). Saab's Gripen Next Generation (JAS 39E/F), however, is being incorporated in the evaluation, along with the Advanced (Block 60+) F-16E/F from Lockheed Martin, Rafale and Typhoon. According to de Vries, manufacturers are being given 60 days to respond to the Dutch request for updated information, but he admits that initially, Dassault and Eurofighter have "reacted negatively" to the Dutch RFI. Dassault and Eurofighter sources say they feel that the Dutch have in fact already taken a decision to go forward with the F-35, and that the evaluation is nothing more than window dressing. According to the Dutch defense ministry, the evaluation will be fair as it will involve "independent analysts" from Dutch defense research institute TNO Defense, Security and Safety; the country's National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR); and RAND Europe. However, both NLR and TNO are involved in a major way in JSF development work. In addition to that, the Netherlands has invested $800 million in JSF System Development and Demonstration; more than 70 Dutch companies are involved in the program (with over $700 million worth of orders received so far); and Dutch industry business over the life of the JSF is forecasted to be worth more than $10 billion (significantly more than the cost of the F-35 program to Dutch tax payers). The Dutch intend to procure up to 85 F-35As (although this number may yet be reduced to less than 60), including two test aircraft and one or two batches of series-production JSFs planned to enter service from 2014, with the first Dutch F-35A squadron officially planned to reach initial operational capability in 2015 (more realistically, 2016). This is the current Dutch schedule for F-35A deliveries: 2011: 1 (test aircraft for IOT&E participation) 2012: 1 (test aircraft for IOT&E participation) 2014: 2 2015: 4 2016: 9 2017: 10 2018: 10 2019: 10 2020: 10 2021: 10 2022: 10 2023: 8 And this is the schedule for F-16s (total remaining: 87 aircraft after the latest round of cuts has been implemented) being withdrawn from service: 2015: 12 2016: 12 2017: 12 2018: 12 2019: 12 2010: 12 2021: 15

Latest concept pics I've seen ...

From Defense Aerospace US, Poland, Reach Tentative Deal on Missile Defense (Source: Voice of America news; issued July 2, 2008) STATE DEPARTMENT --- U.S. officials say the United States and Poland have reached a tentative agreement under which part of a U.S. missile defense system will be based on Polish soil. The deal to station interceptor missiles in Poland still requires top-level Polish government approval. A senior Bush administration official says the two sides have finalized the text of a draft accord, under which Poland will join the Czech Republic in hosting a regional U.S. defense system aimed against an anticipated long-range missile threat from Iran. No terms of the tentative deal were disclosed though Poland had been seeking, in return for accepting the U.S. system, a multi-billion dollar upgrade of its air defense capabilities. The senior official said the deal was hammered out late Tuesday after two days of closed door Washington meetings this week between State Department officials and officials of the Polish defense and foreign ministries. The U.S. plan calls for the stationing of ten interceptor missiles in Poland and an associated advanced radar system in the Czech Republic. A tentative agreement with the Prague government was reached several weeks ago. The planned system has been strongly opposed by Moscow, which contends, despite U.S. denials, that the anti-missile system would undercut its strategic nuclear deterrent. In a talk with reporters Wednesday, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Dan Fried said the United States has tried to address Poland's concerns about the Russian position and other key issues: "The Poles have urged us to reach out to Russia with a serious offer on missile defense, and as you know, we have done so," he said. "The Poles, and the Czechs as well, have urged us to work more with NATO, and if possible get NATO's support for missile defense. We've done so successfully, at the NATO summit last April. And the Poles have also asked us to address Polish modernization. And as you know we have agreed to that as well." Fried, a key participant in the missile dialogue, hailed Poland as a magnificent ally of the United States, noting its role in the U.S.-led military coalitions in both Iraq and in Afghanistan, where Poland has recently increased its troop and aircraft contribution. The senior official who spoke here said the next step in the process is up to the Polish leadership, and did not offer a timeframe for when the agreement would get final approval. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is expected to discuss the missile defense issue, among others, on a European trip next week.

From Defense Aerospace MoD Signs £3 Billion Contracts for Aircraft Carriers (Source: UK Ministry of Defence; issued July 3, 2008) The MoD today signed contracts with industry to build the two future aircraft carriers. The contracts, worth in the region of £3 billion, were signed with the newly-formed UK maritime Joint Venture, BVT Surface Fleet, and the Aircraft Carrier Alliance onboard HMS Ark Royal, one of the Royal Navy's existing aircraft carriers and currently the Fleet Flagship. Contracts authorised today encompass work worth: -- £1,325M for the construction of giant sections of both ships by BVT Surface Fleet at Govan on the Clyde and Portsmouth; -- £300M for the construction of giant sections of the ships at the BAE Systems yard at Barrow-in-Furness; -- £675M for the bow section and final assembly and completion of the ships by Babcock Marine, with assembly taking place at Rosyth; -- £425M for design and engineering for Thales UK; and -- £275M for design and supply of Mission Systems for BAE Systems Integrated Systems Technologies (Insyte) Defence Secretary, Des Browne, said: "This is a historic day for everyone in defence. The two aircraft carriers will provide our forces with the world-class capabilities they will need over the coming decades. They will support peace-keeping and conflict prevention, as well as our strategic operational priorities. "Today's contract signing seals the future for thousands of jobs, and ensures that we will have a Royal Navy fit for the 21st century." Baroness Taylor, Minister for Defence Equipment and Support, said: "This is truly a national project, involving companies from the Clyde to the Solent. Construction work will create or sustain around 10,000 UK jobs at the peak of production. I am delighted that we have signed the contracts for manufacture today and I look forward to first cutting of steel for this exciting project later this year." The future aircraft carriers, to be named HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH and HMS PRINCE OF WALES, will be the biggest and most powerful surface warships ever constructed in the UK. They will provide our forces with world-class capabilities, supporting peace-keeping, conflict prevention and our strategic operational priorities. They will be a highly versatile and potent joint defence asset, able to meet the widest range of tasks. First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Jonathon Band, said: "I am delighted with today's news that the contract for the two new aircraft carriers, to be named HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH and HMS PRINCE OF WALES, has been agreed and signed. These ships, with their embarked aircraft, will provide the UK with a potent and powerful aircraft carrier force that will deliver air power in support of the full range of future operations at sea, in the air and on land." Chief of the Air Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, said: "Today's contract signature marks an important step forward in the Carrier Strike programme. These ships will provide additional options for projecting offensive air power at a time and place of our choosing, and I very much look forward to the arrival of both the carriers and the extremely capable Joint Combat Aircraft on the frontline". Alan Johnston, CEO of BVT Surface Fleet, said: "This is an important announcement for BVT and for the UK maritime industry at large, guaranteeing work for years to come across the country. "We are looking forward to delivering these very important ships to the Fleet in the next decade and intend to begin construction work later this year." Once the carriers enter service in 2014 and 2016 respectively, they are expected to remain in the fleet for at least thirty years. BACKGROUND NOTES: 1. Today's contract signing took place on board HMS Ark Royal at Portsmouth. The signing was also marked by events in Barrow-on-Furness, and the shipyards in Govan and Rosyth, where the ships will be built. 2. The joint venture formed by BAE Systems and VT Group on 1 July will be a key member of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance of companies which will construct and assemble the new carriers at these locations. 3. Other members of the Alliance include Babcock, Thales UK, BAE Systems Submarine Solutions at Barrow and BAE Systems Integrated System Technologies (Insyte). 4. In addition to the manufacture contracts, all parties have signed a legally binding Alliance Agreement, including an Alliance Charter, committing them to work together in a collaborative manner. 5. The carriers are to be named HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. They will displace 65,000 tonnes at deep load, by around 280m long and 70m wide on the flight deck, accommodate around 1,500 personnel and operate a mix of up to 40 aircraft. Their respective in-service dates are planned to be 2014 and 2016. 6. Construction of a hull section at Portsmouth is expected to create/sustain 1,200 jobs; construction of hull sections at Govan is expected to help sustain over 3,000 jobs on the Clyde; construction of a hull section at Barrow-in-Furness is expected to create/sustain 400 jobs in Barrow with additional employment in the North East; work at BAE Systems Insyste at Frimley, Surrey is expected to create/sustain 145 jobs; work under contract to Thales UK at Bristol and Crawley is expected to create/sustain around 250 jobs and assembly of the ships at Rosyth is expected to create/sustain 1600 jobs. 7. Contracts already placed include those for diesel generators, aircraft lifts, the steel for the ships and key electronics. On 4 March, the MoD announced the contract award for a number of long-lead items for the two aircraft carriers, including for the steel that will be used to build the ships. For more details, please click here. 8. On 11 February, a £35m contract was signed by Babcock Engineering Services with Glasgow-based subcontractors Edmund Nuttall Limited to modify the docks in order to accommodate the building of the carriers and widen its direct entrance. (ends) CVF Manufacturing Contract Boosts VT Group (Source: VT Group; issued July 3, 2008) Defence and support services company VT Group has welcomed the announcement today that its new shipbuilding and naval support joint venture, BVT Surface Fleet Limited, is to be the major beneficiary from the manufacturing contract signed for two new Royal Navy aircraft carriers (CVF). The CVF contract will contribute in the region of £3 billion to BVT’s order book, of which just under half will be delivered by the joint venture directly and the balance sub-contracted. CVF revenues will start to flow through BVT shortly with production of the first carrier set to start later this year. VT owns 45 per cent of BVT, with the remaining 55 per cent owned by BAE Systems. VT Group Chief Executive Paul Lester commented: "The formal signing of the manufacturing contract for CVF is a major boost for our new Joint Venture and will ensure that UK shipbuilding has a healthy workload for several years to come." BVT, which officially started operations on July 1, also includes the remaining work on the Royal Navy's Type 45 Anti Air Warfare Destroyer programme and export projects for Oman and Trinidad and Tobago in its order book. (ends) Thales UK Welcomes Contract Signature for New Aircraft Carriers (Source: Thales UK; issued July 3, 2008) The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has today signed the contract for the manufacturing phase of the carrier programme. Defence Secretary Des Browne said in a Written Ministerial Statement: “This is a historic day for everyone in defence. The two aircraft carriers will provide our forces with the world-class capabilities they will need over the coming decades. They will support peace-keeping and conflict prevention, as well as our strategic operational priorities. Today’s contract signing seals the future for thousands of jobs, and ensures that we will have a Royal Navy fit for the 21st century.” Commenting on today's MoD announcement Alex Dorrian, CEO Thales UK, says: "This is tremendous news for Thales UK, representing the most important step forward so far in this hugely significant programme. This means that the Aircraft Carrier Alliance, of which Thales UK is a founding partner, can now begin construction of these ships. We are proud to have been involved from the very early stages in the design of what will be the Royal Navy's largest and most powerful warships. "Within the Alliance of MoD and industry, Thales UK is responsible for leading the platform design, power and propulsion and aviation teams. Thales is also working with BAE Systems in delivering the CVF's mission systems, including the development and manufacture of the communications element. In the longer term, the company is committed to playing a full role in supporting the carriers in service.” The Thales UK-led CVF design and procurement teams are based in Bristol. Our Crawley-based naval communications business will be responsible for the communications aspects. The carriers will provide our front-line forces with the modern, world-class capabilities they will need over the coming decades. The work on the carriers will create or sustain 10,000 jobs across UK at the peak of its production. Thales UK’s Bristol-based design office: Here a team of currently 200+ naval architects, CAD modelling experts, marine engineers and aviation specialists have worked on the CVF design since 1998. Thales UK’s Crawley-based naval communications business: Here a team of around 40 systems engineers work on a number of significant warship programmes for the Royal Navy, including CVF and the Type 45 destroyer.

“You know you never defeated us on the battlefield,” said the American colonel. The North Vietnamese colonel pondered this remark a moment. “That may be so,” he replied, “but it is also irrelevant.” —Col Harry G. Summers Jr and Col Tu, April 1975

Given that the anniversary of the Battle of Beaumont Hamel and Canada Day fall upon the same day, 1 July, there are always mixed emotions in this part of the country when it rolls around.

Fun! The southeast end of the Al Hudaydah airfield looks vulnerable. A cluster of shelters (probably not HAS?), a hardstand (I see six MiG-21s there?) and what looks to be a refueling facility connected to the runway by a single taxiway. A group of what look to be eight An-26 Curl transports (perhaps inoperative?) about 500 m to the north of the MiGs on the old, apparently disused part of the airfield. The maintenance facilities look to be located at the northeast corner of the airfield. I see an Mi-8 Hip and a refueling bowser there too. Not sure if the Etendard/Super Etendard Modernise (SEM) ever carried Durandal, so you might be limited to 250 kg or 450 kg iron bombs, 68mm rockets, or AS.30L laser guided missiles, or if this is a SEM attack in recent years, LGBs.

From Aviation Week Dutch Refuse To Consider Super Hornet Jul 2, 2008 By Joris Janssen Lok The Netherlands defense ministry refuses to include Boeing's F/A-18E/F Super Hornet in an evaluation of potential candidates for its next-generation fighter requirement. Lockheed Martin's F-22 Raptor also will not be considered, despite a direct request from the country's Parliament to include both U.S. fighters in an evaluation of potential alternatives to the Lockheed Martin F-35A Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The Dutch appeared to be firmly committed to the F-35A ever since they joined the JSF System Development & Demonstration program as a Level 2 partner in 2002. But recently there has been growing concern, particularly among left-wing parties in the Parliament, about perceived cost overruns. In May, Parliament called for the addition of the Super Hornet, Raptor and Sweden's Saab Gripen Next Generation to the shortlist of JSF alternatives. The request was part of a compromise that enabled the defense ministry to proceed with a plan to order two F-35A aircraft for participation in the F-35 Initial Operational Test & Evaluation that starts in 2011. According to Jack de Vries, the Dutch state secretary for defense procurement, the F/A-18E/F had been considered as a candidate in 2001-2002 but was at that time deselected because of limitations in range, self-protection and sensors. "The twin-engined jet is also relatively big and heavy, so that it does not fit inside our NATO-standard F-16 hardened aircraft shelters; also, its through-life cost is relatively high," says de Vries, who predicts that these considerations will also play a role in Denmark, which has the same size shelters as the Netherlands. [CV32: Emphasis mine. Sounds much the same as the problem that the Swiss had with the Superbug]. Boeing recently entered the Super Hornet as a late-entry contender for the Danish fighter requirement, competing against the F-35A and the Gripen Next-Generation. In a June 27 letter to Parliament, de Vries suggests that while Australia and the U.S. Navy are ordering Super Hornets, they are doing so "until the JSF will be available in sufficient numbers." He states that the Dutch have no need for an interim solution as they plan to buy the F-35 early. "Based on how Americans and Australians regard the Super Hornet in relation to JSF, and based on the results of our evaluation in 2002, the F/A-18E/F cannot be considered as a relevant option for F-16 replacement in our country," de Vries says. As for the F-22, de Vries points out that the aircraft is "much bigger and heavier than the JSF and requires two engines, resulting in considerably higher operating and through-life costs." The acquisition cost per aircraft would also be much higher, he says, while there is a U.S. ban on exporting the F-22 "even to friendly allies." The defense ministry will, however, consider the Gripen Next Generation as an alternative option, alongside the three existing alternatives (the Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 3, Dassault Rafale Standard F4 and Lockheed Martin Advanced (Block 60+) F-16E/F), de Vries says. "In our previous evaluation, the Saab Gripen was deselected because it was found to have considerable shortcomings in range, armament, self-protection, interoperability and sensors," de Vries says. "Saab has recently announced that a new version of Gripen is being developed, Gripen Next Generation, information on which so far is limited to what has been published in open sources. We will investigate this Next Generation variant in the coming months, particularly to assess the developments compared with the previous Gripen version. To do this, we need cooperation from the manufacturer, and we have contacted the company to ask for the information required." De Vries says that provided the Gripen Next Generation meets the minimum requirements, it will be reviewed using the latest insights. The new evaluation will be performed by the defense ministry with help from independent analysts from Dutch defense research institute TNO Defense, Security and Safety; the country's National Aerospace Laboratory NLR; and RAND Europe.

Lest we forget ... https://www.vac-acc.gc.ca/remembers/sub.cfm...m/beaumonthamel

From Flight International The UK Royal Air Force has formally cleared some of its Eurofighter Typhoons as ready to perform air-to-surface operations, following the 1 July declaration of the type's multirole employment date. Achieved through a so-called "austere capability" upgrade to some of the RAF's Tranche 1 Typhoons, the ground-attack mission will be performed using 455kg (1,000lb) Raytheon Paveway II laser- and Enhanced Paveway II laser/GPS-guided bombs ... and the Rafael Litening III targeting pod. The modifications were successfully demonstrated during 11 Sqn's participation in a recent Green Flag West close-air support exercise at Nellis AFB, Nevada. "This latest capability upgrade gives the Royal Air Force the most operationally flexible aircraft it has ever had," said Air Chief Marshal Sir Clive Loader, commander-in-chief Air Command, during a ceremony at RAF Coningsby, Lincolnshire.