CV32

A new rumour is emerging ... Defense Update has more: INS Hanit Suffers Iranian Missile Attack Updated: July 17, 2006: According to Israel Defense Forces (IDF) sources, the attack was conducted by Chinese C-802. Apparently, two missiles were launched toward the Israel Navy Ship (INS) Hanit (Spear), SAAR V class corvette patrolling the Lebanese coast 16 kilometers from the shore. The attack was a coordinated, simultaneous “high/low” attack - the first “high” missile passed over the Israeli ship. Missing the target, it continued flying, hitting and sinking a civilian Egyptian ship cruising 60 kilometers from the shore. The second missile followed a sea-skimming flight profile hitting the Israeli vessel at the stern, killing four sailors and setting the flight deck on fire and crippling the propulsion systems inside the hull. Surviving the potentially devastating attack INS Hanit returned to Ashdod naval base for repairs. The simultaneous attack was probably using two techniques as well, ensuring maximum chances of success. The Israeli Navy believes the missiles used targeing data from Lebanese coastal radars, therefore maintaining low electro-magnetic signature throughout the attack prparation phase. The first missiles was apparently used as a radar-guided “bait”. seducing the ship to deploy its defensive systems against it, focusing all the attention on the “obvious” threat while the second sea-skimming missile closing below. A supporting fact for this assumption is the fact that the first missile locked on the unfortunate Egyptian ship 44 kilometers away, as it was the next visible target in its flightpath. The second, missile could have been guided by radar or, more probably, Electro-optically. This method would require the launch of two types of missiles, a C-801/802 for the “high” profile and a C-701 TV guided missile for the “low” profile. According to an Associated Press report, based on an interview with an unnamed IDF official, the Israeli vessel didn’t use its electronic countermeasures systems as they did not anticipate such a threat in the area. Yet, this comment is questionable, as there were repeated intelligence reports about Iranian supplies of sophisticated equipment, missiles and drones to the Hizbollah. However, the naval or coastal defense missiles were not mentioned specifically, leading the Israelis to remain unaware of the imminent threat. C-801 radar guided anti-ship missile weighs about 750 kg, it is powered by a rocket motor and has a range of 40 km and is equipped with 100 kg warhead. The upgraded C-802 uses a rocket booster for launch, and a turbojet cruise motor, giving it a range of up to 140. The warhead uses about 180 kg of shaped charge explosives, which makes it a most capable threat to major warships including U.S. aircraft carriers. The C-701, (also known as Iranian Kosar) is deployed with Iranian forces as a truck mounted coastal defense missile, it is much smaller than the C-801/802, weighing about 100 kg, its range is about 18-20 km and the warhead has 29 kg of explosives, set with a delayed activation fuze to maximize internal damage after hull penetration. It uses an Infrared/TV seeker or active millimeter terminal guidance.

Is the Sa'ar modular in design like the"mission packages" of, dare I say it, the LCS Class? Not modular in the same manner as LCS (or the MEKO frigates), afaik, but from what I understand, the OTO 76mm gun and the Phalanx CIWS systems are interchangeable on a mount on the forward deck. Other weapons and sensors are fixed, I believe, but there was some talk during the trials of this class that some topweight problems might be solved by carrying a reduced load of Barak and Harpoon, and dropping the Gabriels except during wartime. But the recent references to the Sa'ar V class that I have seen make no mention of this reduction.

Latest news from Jane's Defence Weekly Hizbullah hits Israel's INS Hanit with anti-ship missile By Alon Ben-David JDW Correspondent on the Israeli-Lebanese border Israel's INS Hanit, a Eilat (Sa'ar 5)-class missile corvette, was struck on 14 July by an Iranian-made C-802 Noor (Tondar) radar-guided anti-ship missile, fired by Hizbullah from Beirut. "We were not aware that Hizbullah possessed this kind of missile," said Rear Admiral Noam Faig, Israel Navy (IN) head of operations, told Jane's. "We are familiar with that missile from other areas but assumed that the threat was not present in Lebanon." The Noor, based on the Chinese C-802, was reported to have a 200 km range during manoeuvres conducted by the Iranian Navy in April 2005. An initial debrief of the incident suggested that the Hanit was sailing without fully activating its Barak-point defence system. For other, undisclosed reasons, the Hanit's electronic countermeasures and electronic support measures, as well as the Vulcan Phalanx close-in weapon system failed to block or intercept the missile. "It's a very painful blow to the IN," admitted an IN source, "but it could have been worse if they had hit another section of the ship."

A topic which (unsurprisingly) is taking up a lot of bandwidth on Harpgamer IRC these days is the recent attack by an anti-ship missile(s) on the Israel Defence Force's Sa'ar V (Eilat) class corvette INS Hanit. Here's a summary of what has been reported and some comments on the same. Please feel free to add your own thoughts. My hope is to make this into a little "case study" of sorts, and hopefully we can all learn something from it. It has been said that tonne for tonne, the Sa'ar V corvettes are among the most heavily armed warships in the world. As a primer, the Naval Technology website has a helpful summary of the Sa'ar V and its various systems, sensors and weapons. You can find it here. The Israeli Weapons website is also helpful, found here. The Federation of American Scientists (FAS) website has a description of the C-802 missile here. Here's my own amalgamation of what the various media are reporting ... And my comments regarding same, taken in turn … (1) If the Hanit was shelling shore targets at the time, then the ship must have been equipped with the OTO 76mm/62 gun rather than the Phalanx CIWS. Scratch one method of defending itself. (2) The incident occurred at dusk, or at least in limited visibility. This would seem to lend credence to the use of a radar guided missile (like the C-802) rather than an electro-optically (TV or infrared) guided weapon. Keep in mind, as well, the Hanit's stealth features. (3) The C-802 is a relatively sophisticated anti-ship missile, in many ways a Chinese copy of the French Exocet (remember the Falklands ?). In some ways it seems unlikely that Hizballah would have access to such a weapon, but the fact remains: they have struck a very capable Israeli warship and achieved a mission kill, and perhaps another commercial vessel has fallen victim to the same weapon. Iran has only had the C-802 since the early 1990s, and then in limited numbers until at least the mid to late 1990s. If indeed Iran supplied the C-802 to Hizballah, then either Iran has plenty of these missiles, has begun its own manufacture of them, or is simply willing to distribute them rather recklessly. In any event, proof of Iran's tacit or direct involvement could have serious political ramifications. (4) I have yet to see credible photos of the damage sustained by the Hanit. But reports indicate that the damage was serious, enough to sustain a bad fire that continued for an extended period of time, cause the loss of at least four crew members, and require the Hanit to be knocked out of action at least temporarily or need towing. This in spite of the ship's seemingly decent damage control features. The Hanit has a steel hull and aluminum (… oy) superstructure, 11 watertight compartments, six fire zones, and a secondary operations room aft. (5) The Hanit's hard kill air defence systems include a pair of 32 cell Barak I point defence SAM systems; the OTO 76mm or 20mm Phalanx CIWS (in this case, the 76mm seems likely); and a pair of manually aimed Sea Vulcan 25mm air defence guns. All of these (excepting the 76mm) were reportedly not active at the time. (6) The ship's impressive sensors and soft kill defensive systems include an Elta EL/M-2218S AMDR advanced missile detection radar (oops !), Elisra NS-9003A/NS-9005 integrated ESM/ECM suite, Tadiran NATACS COMINT system, El-Op MSIS electro-optical surveillance and tracking system, and three DESEAVER decoy launchers. If the active radars and jammers were not energized, what happened with the passive systems ? These are some points I thought might provoke further discussion.

After Action Report: Operation Island Wind A scenario by Akula Let me say, first of all, this scenario is indeed a job well done, especially for a first completed and released scenario. I don't profess to be an expert, but I've created a few scenarios and played a few, and this one was really a good job. Hats off ! As well, I must point out just how "prophetic" this scenario turned out to be. The very same day that Akula posted his scenario announcement, North Korea launched half a dozen missiles or more, arousing Japan’s ire. To set up for the strike against the missile base, I moved the three surface action groups (centred on the Kongo class Aegis destroyers Chokai and Myoko, and the Takanami class destroyer Onami) westward through the Sea of Japan, creating an AAW barrier that I would seek to exploit later. The submarine Oyashio set out on a sweeping course along the DPRK’s northeast coast, sniffing out surface and subsurface contacts alike. In the air, F-15J and F-2 fighters were directed to probe the DPRK air defences along their eastern coast. An E-767 AEW&C platform was moved into an orbit near Miho to give decent coverage over the battle zone. The DPRK air force responded promptly, their antiquated Soviet era fighters launching to meet the JASDF efforts. Unlike the Fulcrums, the more numerous Fishbeds and Frescos had no chance of tackling the JASDF fighters, but that didn’t prevent them from making the attempt. Consistently and continually they rose from DPRK airfields, but each time they were swatted down by either AMRAAM air-air missiles or SM-2s from the JMSDF warships. However, it turns out that I didn’t show enough respect for the long range SA-5 SAMs, and several Eagles were lost to barrages from these “flying telephone poles”. Ashore, a pair of F-2s were struck down while probing the defenses around Kojo. A decent SEAD capability and a few standoff weapons were sorely missed. A quartet of North Korean missile craft were soon discovered off the coast of Kojo, moving at speed to counter the Chokai SAG. Several F-2s were rearmed with ASM-2 antiship missiles, and shortly thereafter the enemy formation was decimated. It wasn’t long until the Oyashio encountered its own nemesis, a Romeo submarine cruising silently eastward. Though hardly a match for the modern Japanese sub, the Romeo was nevertheless a direct threat. The target was at near maximum range, so two Type 89 torpedoes were launched. One struck home, its victim unaware of its impending doom until the last moment. By now, the density of the air defences around Hochon missile base had largely been determined, and the news was not good. Without SEAD capability and a general lack of precision guided weaponry, killing this threat was not going to be easy. And time was running out. I needed a solution … fast. It was decided that the Takanami group would run for the coast near Hochon, and hopefully get into a position where it could use its 5 inch gun to shell the local air defences. Helicopters from all three SAGs – armed with Hellfires - would add to the offensive firepower while Eagles and a E-767 were moved in behind the naval AAW screen. The plan worked perfectly. Well, almost perfectly. Takanami was able to hit several AAA positions along the coast, making way for the helicopters to peel back the next layer of defences with Hellfire strikes. The DPRK attempted to intercept the helicopters and attack the Japanese warships just offshore, but were easily dispatched by the AAW umbrella. In the end, only one SH-60JKai was lost, to an unknown attacker. (Special thanks to Akula for making it possible for me to do something I haven't done in awhile in HC: conduct a naval bombardment of shore targets. ) Another small group of North Korean fast attack craft was encountered near Hochon, but an assortment of Harpoon and SSM-1 antiship missiles from both the Chokai and Takanami groups made sure they were no threat, now or ever. A pair of Romeos was also discovered further offshore by the Myoko SAG, and pounced on by the group’s helicopters. The aged subs had no chance. With a path to the target blown wide open, several waves of F-2 fighters, operating at near their maximum endurance, penetrated into DPRK territory and one by one loosed their GCS-1 guided bombs. The launch site severely damaged, minimum victory was attained with about four hours left to go. Thanks to Akula for a challenging and enjoyable scenario. Superb job !

From Defense Aerospace MND Mulls US$4b Budget for 66 Fighters (Source: Taiwan government news; issued July 13, 2006) While Taiwan is planning to increase its defense budget to cope with military threats from China, the Ministry of National Defense is assessing a plan to buy sixty-six F-16 C/D fighters from the United States for NT$130 billion (US$4 billion) in order to strengthen its air defense capabilities. The deal was proposed in response to President Chen Shui-bian's plan to increase the percentage of the defense budget from 2.4 percent to 2.85 percent of Taiwan's GDP in fiscal year 2007, a local Chinese-language newspaper quoted sources in the MND as saying on Thursday. The opposition Kuomintang and People First Party, which together hold a slim majority in the Legislature, said they are not opposed to buying new weapons as long as the money for this purpose is included in the annual budget. The budget for buying the F-16 C/D Block 52 fighters would likely appear alongside other budgets for the purchase of eight diesel-fueled traditional submarines, 12 P-3C anti-submarine aircraft, and eight batteries of PAC-III missiles in next year's defense budget to be sent to the Legislature for screening later this year. The sources said once the deal is concluded Taiwan will also begin technical cooperation with P&W Co. for the manufacture, assembly and maintenance of P100 PW engines for F-16 fighters in Taiwan. A P&W executive expressed confidence in cooperation with Taiwan's aerospace industry after checking on its production lines and other facilities. Taiwan needs F-16 C/D fighters to help maintain its air supremacy in the Taiwan Strait, as chances of acquiring new generation fighters being developed in the United States are slim in the next 10 to 15 years, said an MND official. Presently the Taiwan Air Force has a fleet of 340 second-generation fighters, including F-16s, Mirage-2000s, and IDF-3 fighters. In addition, it has first generation 70-80 F-5E fighters that will be replaced in the next ten years. The F-16 C/D fighters are equipped with F100-PW229 engines that have greater thrust than the F100-PW200 engines on Taiwan's F-16 fighters. The new fighters would be replacing the F-5E fighters that have been in service for 20 years, and part of Taiwan's Mirage 2000 fighter fleet known for its high maintenance costs. The proposed deal was raised in a recent military workshop held in Washington in February, with the participation of foreign service and military officers as well as defense industry representatives from the United States and Taiwan. Most of the participants agreed that Taiwan should have F-16 C/D fighters to cope with China's military buildup. Among other weapons on Taiwan's priority procurement list are naval anti-aircraft missiles for the country's new frigates and 30 AH-64 and S-Z assault helicopters for the formation of an army squadron of airborne rangers. The budget for buying these new weapons would exceed NT$200 billion if the 66 F-16 C/D fighters is included. These costs will be evenly distributed in annual defense budgets over the next 6-8 years.

From Defense Aerospace Franco-Italian Horizon Programme: Chevalier Paul Launched (Source: DCN; issued July 13, 2006) LORIENT, France --- The Chevalier Paul, the second of two Horizon anti-air warfare (AAW) frigates for the French Navy, was ceremonially launched at DCN's Lorient shipyard on Wednesday 12 July 2006. The event was organised jointly by DCN and Horizon SAS. In addition to representatives of the main Horizon partners, the guests of honour included Laurent Giovachini, deputy director of French defence procurement agency DGA and director of weapon systems. The launch marks an important milestone in this Franco-Italian naval cooperation programme. The DGA and NAVARM, the Horizon customers and contracting principals, appointed Horizon SAS, a joint subsidiary of Armaris and Orizzonte Sistemi Navali, as the overall programme prime contractor. Armaris is a DCN/Thales joint venture and Orizzonte a Fincantieri/Finmeccanica joint venture. Horizon frigates are designed to control the airspace over theatres of operations, provide anti-air cover for carrier groups and convoys and participate in public service missions. As overall programme prime contractor, the Horizon SAS consortium awarded the design and shipbuilding contracts to DCN in France and Fincantieri in Italy. It then awarded the combat system prime contract to EuroSysnav, an Armaris/Finmeccanica joint venture drawing on the industrial resources of DCN, Finmeccanica and Thales. The Horizon programme calls for the design and construction of four new-generation AAW frigates — two for the French Navy and two for the Italian Navy — and associated logistic support. French Horizon frigates Forbin and Chevalier Paul will replace AAW frigates Suffren and Duquesne. Italian Horizon frigates Andrea Doria and Caio Duilio will replace AAW frigates Ardito and Audace. All four will be fitted with the PAAMS principal anti-air missile system developed jointly by France, Italy and the UK. Major milestones: --8 April 2002: first plates cut for first French frigate --19 July 2002: first plates cut for first Italian frigate --19 September 2003: first plates cut for second Italian frigate --1st December 2003: first plates cut for second French frigate --10 March 2005: first French frigate launched --14 October 2005: first Italian frigate launched --12 July 2006: second French frigate launched. The Horizon programme is setting a new standard in cooperation between the French and Italian naval contractors. Together, the countries have undertaken the joint development and construction of warships that are among their respective navies' most sophisticated. The programme also points to the shape of things to come as European naval shipbuilding evolves towards closer cooperation led by the industry majors. The move towards closer cooperation was confirmed when Joint Armaments Cooperation Organisation OCCAR awarded co-prime contracts for the Franco-Italian FREMM multimission frigate programme to DCN/Thales subsidiary Armaris and Italian partner Orizzonte Sistemi Navali.

Date: September 1, 1944 (morning) Location: North Atlantic, southeast of Greenland Weather: Cloudy, light fog, light wind U-boats: 3 x VIIB (1944) Enemy force encountered: Escorted convoy Results: Brains: Tonnage: 15,625 merchant, 2,138 warship; Renown: 700 Sunk: 1 x Flower Corvette, 2 x Small Merchants, 1 x V&W DD, 1 x T2 Tanker CV32: Tonnage: 15,612 merchant, 1,900 warship; Renown: 700 Sunk: 2 x Flower Corvette, 3 x Coastal Merchant, 4 x Small Merchant TonyE: Tonnage: 13,201 merchant; Renown: 390 Sunk: 1 x C2 Cargo, 2 x Small Merchant, 1 x Coastal Merchant Friendly Losses: None (Battle honors to the crew of the Flower Corvette that escaped several torpedo shots, finally taking a hit that crippled the ship but did not sink her. They battled to the last).

I have some info, from a variety of sources, none particularly recent ... I know JED (now defunct) did a nice series on Soviet/Russian anti-tank missiles a while back, but iirc, the AT-8 wasn't among them. *** AT-8 "Songster" (9M112 Kobra) US alphanumeric designation: AT-8 NATO codename: Songster Russian designation, missile: 9M112 Kobra Russian designation, system: 9K112 Missile diameter: 125 mm Launch weight: 25 kg Max range: 4000 m Muzzle velocity: 125 m/s Max velocity: 500 m/s Warhead: HEAT Penetration: 600 mm steel armor Guidance: radio command SACLOS The Songster is fired from the gun tube of the T-64B MBT. A boost motor launches the ATGM from the barrel and a main motor carries it all the way to the target, at a max range of 4000 m. Its HEAT warhead probably penetrates at least 600 mm of steel armor but likely not Chobham type or ERA. The radio transmitter for the AT-8 is located in a steel box in front of the right commander's cupola. The gunner need only keep the sight on the target until the ATGM impacts. The T-64B can fire a max of four AT-8 Songster ATGMs per min. The MBT normally carries six ATGMs plus its 36 rds of 125mm ammunition. It can also engage helicopters with the AT-8 ATGM. *** The Russians have operated gun tube launched ATGWs for some time now, and there are at least four types currently in service. The first, the AT-8 Songster, showed up aboard the T-64B back in the very early 1980s or possibly earlier. It is also fired from the T-80 and T-80B. The T-72B1 (Super Dolly Parton), T-72S, T-80U and T-90 can fire the AT-11 Sniper (Svir 9M119). The 125mm 2A45M Sprut-B towed anti-tank gun may also be able to launch these ATGMs. The AT-10 Sniper (Bastion 9M117) can be fired from the T-55 AM2P, T-55 AMB, T-55 AMV, BMP-3 and the T-12 towed anti-tank gun. Even the T-62M has been retrofitted with an ATGM called the Sheksna. Unlike most conventional ATGMs of its kind, the AT-8 Songster relied on a radio datalink, instead of wires, to transmit guidance commands. The later AT-10, AT-11 and Sheksna are all laser beamriding weapons. They are not laser homing ATGMs like Hellfire, which homes on a spot of reflected laser light on the target. Instead, they maintain their position in the centre of a cone of focused laser light projected from the launcher. As the ATGM travels further from the launcher, the focus is adjusted further downrange, maintaining a constant field which the ATGM can refer to in order to sense its own position. Since the laser is not focused on the target, laser warning receivers will not respond until very late in the engagement when the laser is high due to the proximity of the ATGM. At this point it is usually too late to react. The purpose of gun-launched ATGWs was to correct for Russian deficiency in long range gun accuracy, and the fall-off in penetrating power of KE rounds, especially early high-drag fin stabilized versions. The AT-8 Songster has a range of 4000 m, and the AT-10 and AT-11 have a range of somewhere between 4000-5000 m. Both have respectable penetrations in the region of 700-800 mm RHA. While this will not bother an Abrams frontally, it would certainly stir up the majority of NATO MBTs at the time the weapons were designed, and wreak havoc with anything more lightly armored. The AT-8 is listed as having a secondary anti-helicopter capability. Let us compare it with the AT-6 Spiral, another ATGW with an explicit AA role. The AT-6 has a speed of 350-400 m/s, and a range of 5000 m. It is claimed to be capable of engaging airborne targets with a crossing speed of 60 m/s (134 mph) and at heights up to 3000 m. This is certainly within the envelope of most helicopters. The AT-8 has a speed of 500 m/s and a range of 4000 m, suggesting that it has more energy than the AT-6 at medium to long range, and thus an equal or greater ability versus fast-moving airborne targets. Furthermore, with a speed of almost twice that of most NATO ATGWs (ie. HOT at 235 m/s, TOW at 278 m/s), Songster has a fighting chance of getting to the target before the helicopter can escape or respond. The AT-10 and AT-11 are not claimed to be anti-helicopter weapons, but with a quoted speed of Mach 2+ (5 sec to 4000 m), they have both the energy and the reaction time. They would not be the only laser beamriding air defence missile (ie. ADATS, Starburst and Starstreak). Hellfire has a speed of about Mach 1.4, and has been successfully fired against drones in tests. *** The AT-8 “Songster” is a Russian ATGM designed to be fired from the 125mm smoothbore gun of MBTs. It uses radio guidance and has a flight speed of 250 m/s. With a range of 4000 m, it can penetrate 550 mm of flat steel and 445 mm of sloped steel armor. Weight: 30 kg Range: 4000 m Speed: 250 m/s Guidance: Radio command Warhead: HEAT Armor penetration: 445 to 550 mm Alternate launch platform: Mi-24

Pete, you know as well as I that playing any wargame other than Harpoon is grounds for being sent for therapy (except Silent Hunter III, of course ... oh, and Red Orchestra ...)

Interesting stuff, Pete. Thanks for sharing it.

Date: June 1, 1944 (morning) Location: North Atlantic, south of Greenland Weather: Clear, light fog, light wind U-boats: 3 x VIIB (1944) Enemy force encountered: Lightly escorted convoy Results: CV32: Tonnage: 61,009 merchant; Renown: 1,810 Sunk: 3 x T2 Tanker, 3 x Liberty Cargo Brains: Tonnage: 38,778 merchant; Renown: 1,300 Sunk: 1 x Passenger Liner, 1 x C2 Cargo, 1 x C3 Cargo TonyE: Tonnage: 25,431 merchant, 1,400 warship; Renown: 880 Sunk: 1 x T3 Tanker, 1 x Buckley DE, 1 x C2 Cargo, 1 x Liberty Cargo Friendly Losses: None Enemy Damage: 1 x C2 Cargo, 1 x Liberty Cargo (peppered with a few thousand rounds of 20mm, and rammed repeatedly, but chugged onward)

Date: March 1, 1944 Location: North Atlantic, southwest of the Canary Islands Weather: Clear, light fog, light wind U-boats: 3 x VIIB (1944) Enemy force encountered: Task force (including 5 x Casablanca Escort Carriers) Results: Brains: Tonnage: 32,600 warship; Renown: 1,390 Sunk: 3 x Casablanca Escort Carrier, 1 x Buckley DE CV32: Tonnage: 13,200 warship; Renown: 680 Sunk: 1 x Casablanca Escort Carrier, 2 x Buckley DE TonyE: Tonnage: 10,400 warship; Renown: 420 Sunk: 1 x Casablanca Escort Carrier Friendly Losses: All (depth charged by Buckley DE's) Enemy Damage: 1 x Buckley DE (sustained torpedo hit in stern by CV32)

From Defence Talk Iraq Warns Turkey Against Any Military Incursions Reuters Fri, 7 Jul 2006, 00:49 Iraq warned neighboring Turkey on July 6 to refrain from any military incursions into its northern border region to fight Kurdish guerrillas based there. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari, on a visit to Athens, noted no Turkish incursions had taken place so far. "But if this does happen in the future, then our position will be different," he said after meeting Greek counterpart Dora Bakoyanni. "Iraq will demand its borders are not violated and that no country is involved in its domestic matters." Ankara has kept around 1,500 special operations forces in northern Iraq since the 1990s to prevent infiltration into southeast Turkey by PKK Kurdish guerrillas. Earlier this year, Ankara reinforced its southeast border region with 40,000 troops, adding to 220,000 already there. Turkey has long urged U.S. and Iraqi troops in northern Iraq to crack down on the Kurdish rebels who use their mountain hideouts as a springboard to attack forces across the border. Ankara blames the banned Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) for the deaths of at least 30,000 people since the group launched an armed campaign for a separate Kurdish homeland in southeast Turkey in 1984. "All countries know that sovereignty must be respected and there should be no intervention in domestic issues," Zebari said. "There is no doubt the developments in Iraq are very critical for the whole region.

From Defence Talk Taiwan To Test Fire Cruise Missile Capable Of Hitting China AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE Fri, 7 Jul 2006, 01:19 Taipei: Taiwan plans to test-fire a cruise missile capable of hitting rival China despite concerns from the United States, a report here said Thursday. The cruise missile, with a range of 600 kilometers (360 miles), will be test-fired at a ceremony in September attended by President Chen Shui-bian in the south of the island, the ettoday.com online newspaper said. "The United States has voiced concerns to Taiwanese authorities as the missile has exceeded the 300-kilometer limit" under the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Chinese-language paper said. The MTCR is a voluntary association of countries aimed at preventing proliferation of such missiles, although Taiwan is not a signatory. China's southeastern coastal cities in Fuzhou and Guangdong provinces would be within range of the cruise missile which will be launched from Chiupeng military base in Pingtung county, the website said. Taiwan has reportedly test-fired cruise missiles in the past although the defence ministry has never confirmed the launches. The ministry declined to comment on Thursday's report which comes just one day after North Korea test-fired seven missiles, including a long-range Taepodong-2 capable of reaching the United States, sparking international outrage. The missiles splashed down in the Sea of Japan (East Sea). Taiwan has produced three prototypes of a cruise missile which could be used to strike the east coast of China, Jane's Defence Weekly has said. In an article in January, the authoritative weekly said Taiwan plans to produce 50 of the missiles called Hsiung Feng 2E (Brave Wind) before 2010 and up to 500 after 2010. "If deployed on Penghu Island in the south or Tungyin Island in the north, it could strike as far south as Hong Kong and as far north as Shanghai," a source was quoted as saying in the article. China has repeatedly threatened to invade Taiwan should it declare formal independence, prompting the island to seek more advanced weaponry to defend itself. The Pentagon released a report in July last year warning that China had deployed up to 730 ballistic missiles targeting Taiwan. It said Beijing's build-up could tip the military balance against Taiwan and threaten other countries in the region. Taiwan's military-run Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology, the developer of the cruise missile, is planning to extend its range to 1,000 kilometers, the weekly said. The Chungshan Institute is also working on a short-range ballistic missile based on the Tien Kung (Sky Bow) air-defence missile system, the weekly said. The ballistic missile and cruise missile are integral to Taiwan's "active defence" policy, which aims to counter any aggression before it reaches Taiwanese territory, it said. Relations between China and Taiwan, which split in 1949 at the end of a civil war, have worsened since independence-leaning Chen Shui-bian was elected president in 2000. He was re-elected last year.

From Air Force Times July 07, 2006 JSF named ‘Lightning II’ By Laura M. Colarusso Times staff writer With a nod to Air Force history, the service’s chief of staff has dubbed the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter “Lightning II.” Gen. T. Michael Moseley announced the decision Friday at the Lockheed Martin facility in Fort Worth, Texas, where the stealthy multi-role fighter is made. He based the decision on input received from airmen as well as the other services and coalition partners involved in the JSF program, said Maj. Glen Roberts, a spokesman for the general. The P-38 Lightning, the JSF’s namesake, was designed in the late 1930s and was used during World War II. The Air Force’s top two aces, Richard Bong and Thomas McGuire, both flew the Lightning, amassing 78 kills between them in the plane, Roberts said. The name also refers to a supersonic British jet called the Lightning, built in the 1950s by English Electric. English Electric eventually became BAE Systems, an industry partner on the program. Moseley considered five other names: Mamba, Cyclone, Piasa, Reaper and Spitfire II. Friday’s ceremony also marked the first public unveiling of the F-35A, the conventional take-off-and-landing variant. The aircraft rolled off the production line in February and has been involved in ground tests since, said Lockheed Martin F-35 spokesman John Kent. First flight of the aircraft is scheduled for late October or early November, Kent added.

From Navy Times July 07, 2006 Carrier Reagan returns from maiden deployment By Gidget Fuentes Times staff writer CORONADO, Calif. — With a swarm of colorful posters and festive balloons all around him, Aviation Electronics Technician 1st Class (AW/SW) Ruel Concepcion took in a deep breath and glanced at his ship. “It looks like it’s been through a lot,” said Concepcion, 43, of San Francisco. “I can’t believe it, a six-month deployment. Her first one. This is memorable.” The aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan, all 1,092 feet of military might, had nudged to its berth at North Island Naval Air Station on Thursday to complete its maiden operational deployment. This homecoming was the first time in Concepcion’s 19 years as a sailor that he stood on firm ground instead of manning the rails. After four months afloat, working in Reagan’s aircraft intermediate maintenance department, he returned to San Diego to serve as a training officer with the ship’s Beach Detachment. In recent weeks, as the training leading petty officer, he’s helped organize the huge homecoming festivities along the carrier pier. “I’m glad to see her do a successful, wonderful cruise,” he said, stopping at one point to give a “welcome home” greeting and shake hands with a shipmate searching the vast crowded parking lot for his family. Smiles abounded. Fire Controlman 2nd Class (SW) Marsha Schaal returned home, proud to have attained the qualification as an enlisted surface warfare specialist. The deployment came after a tour on the support ship Camden and the extended 2002-2003 deployment with the Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group. She fell into the embrace of Laurie and Charles Schaal, her parents, among some 1,700 “Tigers” who rode Reagan and its ships home from Hawaii. “That was my first time on the water,” said a grinning Charles, who had flown to Hawaii from their home in Austin, Texas. “We loved it. They did a fine job of entertaining us. We got 1,000 pictures.” Standing on the pier, a beaming Rear Adm. Michael H. Miller spoke gleefully of the sailors and the strike group’s accomplishments. “The good Lord has smiled with us all the way through,” said Miller, who the strike group commander. “We brought everybody back who we left with.” Reagan led a strike group and carrier air wing that flew nearly 3,000 combat sorties over Iraq, often supporting U.S. or coalition ground forces, and which conducted anti-piracy missions off the Horn of Africa, operations with the Iraqi navy in the Northern Persian Gulf and maritime interdictions in the Arabian Sea. During the deployment that took them to the Persian Gulf and through the Western Pacific, crew members went ashore to help repaint old schoolhouses, help villagers and complete some 52 community relations missions. Crew members “were wonderful ambassadors of America,” Miller said. “This ship is a living legacy” to the late president’s memory, he added. “This is about doing your very best to leave the world a better place than you found it,” he said. Reagan will remain in a “ready” status for several months, Miller said. The homecomings stretched across San Diego Bay, where the destroyers Decatur and McCampbell and the cruiser Lake Champlain arrived at the 32nd Street station at San Diego Naval Base earlier in the morning. Robert Hicks, a retired chief petty officer from Harrah, Okla., was about to experience a ship’s homecoming for the very first time. Despite his 22 years in the Navy, deploying worldwide with naval air wings and tallying more than 5,000 flight hours, , Hicks had never been out to sea. That naval tradition is carried by his son, Gas Turbine Systems Technician (Mechanical) 3rd Class (SW) Robert “Jim” Hicks, a 19-year-old on his first combat deployment with Decatur. “I’m very proud of him,” said the elder Hicks, savoring the excited hubbub of the crowd on Pier 2 as they watched Decatur glide across the bay. He was clearly soaking in the experience of a homecoming, with its white-clad sailors, young women dolled up in sundresses and strollers festooned with American flags. “This,” he said, “is the Navy, right here. This is what the Navy is about.” He tried to ease the nerves of Monique Plottner, his son’s girlfriend and mother of a year-old daughter and 2-year-old son, who could barely contain her emotions. Less than an hour later, the brow came down and across came Decatur’s crew. The couple shared a warm kiss and embrace, and the sailor hugged his father. At that, his father laid eyes on more immediate plans. “We’re going to go hunt for a cold beer, and we’re going to find a steak,” he said. Next to Decatur, the crew of McCampbell each got a hand shake and some words from their skipper. “Morale never lagged. There was never a lull in the action, yet they were challenged,” said Cmdr. Vince McBeth. “They have my utmost respect and admiration.” McBeth said he tried to remind them of that, reinforcing what he calls “the McCampbell Way,” a philosophy of duty, honor, mission, integrity and shipmates that is reinforced in a plaque on the ship’s quarterdeck. “Everyone is a shipmate first,” he said, “and then you assume whatever title they may have.”

Thats great, Akula. Thanks.

Thanks. Please note, however, that the geographical coordinates used in the PE/SE map do not always match those in real life. This means that occasionally I have to manually adjust the position of the Installation in the SE in order to find the right set of "game" coordinates. If Duncan appears somewhere it shouldn't be after this latest adjustment, I'll have to look at it again. Also, no need to duck and hide. We have a no-burning-at-the-stake policy here.

From Defense Aerospace Government Statement on North Korea's Missile Launch (Source: Office of the President of South Korea; issued July 5, 2006) Today Senior Secretary Seo Joo-seok for Unification, National Security and Foreign Affairs stated the following: Today the Government convened a meeting of the Standing Committee of the National Security Council (NSC) in the NSC conference room from 7:30 to 8:40 a.m. and discussed the assessment of and countermeasures against North Korea's test-firing of the missiles. On July 5, North Korea is estimated to have fired into the East Sea: -- one Taepodong-2 from a launch site in Taepo-dong of Hwadae-gun, Hambuk(province), at 5 a.m. and -- several Scud- and Rodong-class missiles from a launch site in Gitdaeryeong of Anbyun-gun, Gangwon-do(province) at 03:32 a.m.. Based on the currently available information, the launch of the Taepodong-2 is estimated to have failed. Since early May, the Government has been closely following a series of activities with regard to North Korea's missile test-firing. Pointing out the negative impact to follow a missile launch, the Government has warned repeatedly that a test-firing plan be withdrawn. Despite our repeated warnings, North Korea proceeded with this launch, which is an unwise act to have a negative impact. It would not only deepen North Korea's international isolation by bolstering the stance of the hard-liners against the North in the international community but also impede the peace and stability of Northeast Asia by providing grounds for a buildup of armaments in the region as well as adversely affecting the attitude of the South Koreans toward the North in terms of inter-Korea relations. Thus, the Government expresses profound regrets. North Korea should take responsibility for any situation that may arise from this launch. The Government sternly urges that North Korea discontinue such provocative acts, immediately return to the Six-Party Talks to resolve the issues through dialogue, and comply with the international effort for non-proliferation. In this regard, the Korean Government will continue to closely coordinate with the nations involved for concrete countermeasures against North Korea's launching of missiles. (ends) Statement By the White House Press Secretary (Source: White House Press Office; issued July 4, 2006) WASHINGTON --- On the afternoon of July 4 (Washington, DC time), the U.S. detected multiple missile launches from North Korea, including the Taepo Dong 2. The United States strongly condemns these missile launches and North Korea's unwillingness to heed calls for restraint from the international community. We are consulting with international partners on next steps. This provocative act violates a standing moratorium on missile tests to which the North had previously committed. Regardless of whether the series of launches occurred as North Korea planned, they nevertheless demonstrate North Korea's intent to intimidate other states by developing missiles of increasingly longer ranges. We urge the North to refrain from further provocative acts, including further ballistic missile launches. The September 2005 Joint Statement at the Fourth Round of the Six Party Talks offered the North Korean government and the North Korean people a better path. North Korea's actions only serve to further isolate North Korea and harm its people. While the United States remains committed to a peaceful diplomatic solution and to implementation of the agreed upon Joint Statement, the North Korean regime's actions and unwillingness to return to the talks appears to indicate that the North has not yet made the strategic decision to give up their nuclear programs as pledged to the other five parties. Accordingly, we will continue to take all necessary measures to protect ourselves and our allies. We will be seeking to address this matter in discussions in New York and with our allies and regional partners.

From Defense Aerospace North Korea Conducts Missile Tests (Source: Voice of America news; issued July 5, 2006) WHITE HOUSE --- U.S. officials say North Korea has test fired at least six missiles, including a long-range missile that failed shortly after launch. High level consultations are underway. White House officials call the series of launches a provocation, but add there is no immediate threat to the United States. All the tests occurred early Wednesday morning local time within the span of hours. Most involved short to medium range missiles that landed in the Sea of Japan. But one, the failed missile, was a Taepodong 2, the intercontinental missile that has been a focus of international attention. The White House responded to the news of the launches with caution and relative calm. Spokesman Tony Snow said North Korea has further isolated itself by rebuffing diplomatic efforts and defying neighbors who asked them not to launch. National Security Advisor Steve Hadley said the North Koreans have now broken their own moratorium on testing, which was adopted in 1999. When asked what action the United States might take, now that North Korea has defied calls from the international community to refrain from long range missile testing, both officials put the focus on diplomacy. Snow announced the administration's chief negotiator on North Korea - Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill - will travel to the region later Wednesday. At the same time, Hadley will meet with his South Korean counterpart in Washington. Hadley told reporters President Bush was notified almost immediately once the launches were detected. He said the president was not very surprised that North Korea would defy the international community. He said it is hard to understand why they would do it, and stressed it is important now to be able to assess their true intentions. For his part, the White House spokesman downplayed the notion the launches were timed to coincide with America's Independence Day holiday. When asked by reporters about the timing Tony Snow referred to the North Korean leader and said simply ask King Jong-Il.

Happy 4th of July to you, Pete ! (And congrats on what looks to be a good and safe orbital insertion of the Shuttle).

Congrats, Tony, on the release of your DB. Very cool ! Requests of mine include: * Have Dash air-to-air missile * AIM-155 Advanced Air-Air Missile (AAAM) * Avro Arrow interceptor * B-70 Valkryie bomber * Yak-44 AEW&C aircraft (Russian equivalent of the E-2 Hawkeye) * P-7A Long Range Air ASW Capable Aircraft (LRAACA) * Aurora hypersonic recce aircraft * DarkStar UAV (RQ-3 ?) * Ulyanovsk CVN (cancelled Soviet nuclear powered aircraft carrier) * Arsenal Ship * A-12 Avenger II * RAH-66 Comanche

Date: December 15, 1943 (afternoon) Location: North Atlantic, southwest of the Canary Islands Weather: Cloudy, moderate wind U-boats: 3 x VIIB (1943) Enemy force encountered: Task force Results: Brains: Tonnage: 6,788 warship; Renown: 345 Sunk: 1 x Dido CL, 1 x V&W DD TonyE: Tonnage: 4,115 warship; Renown: 380 Sunk: 1 x C class DD, 1 x J class DD, 1 x Hunt III DD CV32: Tonnage: 3,426 warship; Renown: 360 Sunk: 2 x V&W DD, 1 x Hunt II DD Friendly Losses: None Enemy Damage: 1 x C class DD (torpedoed and sunk by CV32, confirmed by TonyE, but lousy Kriegsmarine refused to give credit)

Thanks, Akula. Will do.