CV32

IMHO, no question, you have to go with the EA-18G. ICAP III is a significant leap ahead in electronic warfare capability, but the Prowler platform is ageing fast, and has other limitations that the Growler will address, like better DEAD (Destruction of Enemy Air Defence) capability (rather than just SEAD), stealthiness, air to air self-defence, and commonality advantages with the F/A-18E/F. Fatigue life with the Prowler is at quote, "unacceptable" levels, and I recall that in late 2003 a significant portion of the EA-6B fleet was grounded due to wear in the wing centre section. They started replacing these sections (where the wing folds to permit efficient storage on the carrier) but fatigue is also apparently bad in the outer wing panels. These birds are being worked hard in the latter stages of their operational life, which is not good. Sometimes I wonder if the GAO is the same crowd who comes up with the "Top Ten" list on Letterman. Their material is obviously researched, and usually amusing, but you gotta wonder just how much time they're spending thinking about these things. I should add that, IMHO, a better question for the GAO (and others) to be considering in the context of EW platforms is what the USAF is going to do now that it has cancelled the B-52 SOJ project. There's a real vacuum there waiting to be filled.

This is the spot, Pete. Thats real bad news for Sri Lanka. Things were real nasty before when they were shooting, and tensions have been pretty high lately. This could be the catalyst that pulls them back into the quagmire.

I don't own a WWII submarine warfare book, and I can't recall ever reading one that stands out in memory. (I'm not sure why that is ... perhaps a shortcoming I'll have to redress if I am to retain my SH3 stripes. ) The first, Silent Victory, and the third, Take Her Deep, seem to stand out in their reviews, Pete. Silent Victory sounds like an excellent analytical account, and is over 1,000 pages ! The author also wrote about the U-Boat war. Take Her Deep is apparently written by the skipper of USS Halibut, and gives a good first hand look at the topic. Decisions, decisions.

Anyone who goads Israel with talk of "wiping them off the map" and "they will vanish", while trying to build a nuclear technology base, is in serious need of professional help. Seems to me he didn't learn that lesson from Saddam very well.

A mini-sub doesn't have to be involved in carrying out a surprise attack in order to be acting defensively. Potential missions that immediately come to mind include: (1) attacking PLAN ships in port before they embark upon "follow-on" assaults (2) attacking PLAN ships as they stand offshore to support and deliver PRC amphibious troops (3) deliver spec ops to retake Taiwanese islands in the Strait etc etc

I really am starting to think this guy is not taking his meds ... CNN story

Oilers bite back in triple OT ... keeping the dream alive. Link

There certainly is. The MH-60R's flexibilty lies in its underwater warfare role and the capabilities that are intrinsic to being a manned platform. Much of the discussion about the Fire Scout's mission payload refers to its EO/IR sensors and laser rangefinder/designator, so although the payload is apparently modular, having this sensor package would probably work to the exclusion of an electronic warfare package (including blip enhance). Wild guesstimate on my part.

From BBC News 1998: India explodes nuclear controversy The Indian government has announced it has carried out a series of underground nuclear tests. It is the first time India has carried out such tests since 1974. The experiments took place without any warning to the international community, and there has been widespread outrage and concern over the move. The test site, in Pokhran in the northern desert state of Rajasthan, is only about 150km (93 miles) from the border with Pakistan. The two countries have fought three wars since independence with Britain in 1947, mainly over the disputed territories of Jammu and Kashmir, and there are fears the tests could escalate the conflict and spark a regional nuclear arms race. 'Contained explosions' Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee broke the news to journalists in a hastily-convened news conference. "These were contained explosions like the experiment conducted in May 1974," he said. "I warmly congratulate the scientists and engineers who have carried out these successful tests." He said the devices tested were a fission device, a low-yield device and a thermonuclear device. He said there had been no release of radioactivity into the atmosphere. There was immediate condemnation of the tests from Pakistan. The Prime Minister of Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif, said his country had been trying to draw the world's attention to India's nuclear programme. "As a sovereign and independent nation," he said, "Pakistan will make its own decision on the steps to be taken towards its sovereignty and defence." Arms race threat There was already strong diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to show restraint and avoid retaliating - the only hope of avoiding a damaging arms race. Last month Pakistan tested its own long-range nuclear missile, the Hatf-5, which has a range of up to 1,500km (932 miles). The tests are said to have contributed to India's decision to launch its own nuclear tests today. India is known to have developed a short-range nuclear missile, the Prithvi, with a range of 150km (93 miles) but it is working on a much longer range system, the Agni, which could reach targets up to 2,500km (1553 miles) away. India, Pakistan and Israel are the three nations widely suspected of nuclear capability which have not joined the 1970 nuclear non-proliferation treaty, now observed by 185 countries.

From DefenseNews Taiwan Plans To Buy Mini-Submarines from United Arab Emirates: MP By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, TAIPEI Taiwan plans to buy up to 12 mini-submarines from the United Arab Emirates for 1.6 billion Taiwan dollars ($50.96 million US), an opposition legislator said May 10. Lin Yu-fang from the Kuomintang party said Deputy Defense Minister Chu Kai-sheng confirmed the plan to buy the twin-seat subs for the Marines during a closed meeting of parliament’s national defense committee. The United Evening News said the deal was part of Taiwan’s efforts to secure approval for President Chen Shui-bian’s stopover in Abu Dhabi last week on his way to Latin America. But the fate of the plan was uncertain as the opposition questioned its wisdom. “I will do everything I can to stop the deal,” said Lin, describing it as “stupid”. The mini-submarines are designed to infiltrate enemy lines on sabotage missions, a military concept of the 1950s, he said. The defense ministry had no comment. During his outward journey last week Chen scrapped plans to stop over in Alaska or Hawaii after Washington restricted him to those destinations rather than New York or San Francisco as he requested. Chen blamed the restrictions on pressure from China. In an apparent rebuff, Chen made transit stops in Abu Dhabi and Amsterdam en route to Paraguay and Costa Rica, two of only 25 nations that recognize Taiwan diplomatically. China opposes any overseas visits by top officials from Taiwan, which it sees as part of its territory awaiting reunification — by force if necessary.

I expect the missile might be easier to spot on IR because of the exhaust plume. Maybe 6.7.4 ? Also, I wonder if the RQ-8 might be equipped with blip enhance ? (see 6.7.2) OK, doesn't look it will be Nulka. (Though I'm not sure why, perhaps size limitations). Rather, the Terma Soft Kill Weapon System (SKWS).

The other things that occurred to me, Pete, were: (1) Any chance of detecting the Exocet by the RQ-8 ? Is it anywhere near the bearing ? (2) Effect of chaff and/or decoys launched by the LCS. For the most part, these are factored into the engagement by PK and such, but I think there are some additional rules which might come into play here. (Offhand, is LCS getting the Nulka decoy ?)

Looks like it might be the year of the upsets, Pete.

LOL, very funny, Pete. I'd respond, and say, real men play Silent Hunter III and Red Orchestra, but of course, I'd be shooting myself in the proverbial foot ...

"Captain, we took two hits starboard aft ... damage control parties report heavy flooding in the engine spaces ... ship's already listing badly ... they're trying to contain the damage, but ... sorry, Sir". Oh well, there's always next year.

Thanks, Pete ... as if I wasn't bummed out enough about this. Turns out the Goalkeeper close in weapon system (Huet) can't stop all the incomers (Staal etc) if the area defense (Souray etc) isn't doing its job. Of course, it helps if the other guy doesn't have an outstanding Kashtan of his own (Ward). It's do or die tonite !

As I understand it, port/harbour radar facilities (where they exist at all) tend to be commercial, non-military types used for basic roles like collision avoidance and weather information. There is probably no equivalent H4.1/HT data. I'd just Google it.

Haha, I thought so too, but ah, we're a fairly uncontroversial bunch. I think the US (and its like minded allies) need to be careful about how they deal with this issue now that Iran is continuing to "play games" with the UN, making half offers of cooperation and so forth. Tehran will exploit the positions of those nations which are opposed to sanctions, those whom are unconvinced, and those whom are weak of will. Meanwhile, the reactors purr (or whatever sound they make) away ...

Looks good, Pete. Most of those who criticize the LCS design appear to be forgetting how, when and where such a ship will be employed. As stated earlier in this thread, no one would expect an LCS to be deployed into harm's way without a great deal of support and overwhelming firepower. After all, the US deployed what, some half a dozen aircraft carriers in support of Operation Desert Storm ? When was the last time you ran a Harpoon scenario where you had a half dozen carriers at your disposal ? I believe the LCS should (and likely will) be able to hold its own in the face of the anticipated threat. The supporting firepower is there to deal with the unanticipated threat. That said, we shouldn't expect the LCS to look like a Tico or a Burke. An ancient Chinese proverb comes to mind that applies to changes in military technology, which says, change is like a dragon ... you can stand in its way, in which case it will destroy you; you can run from it, in which case it will rapidly overtake you and destroy you; or you can jump on its back and let it take you where it will into the future.

Hoo-rah. Hockey talk can only make this site better. Thanks, Pete. I'm a Habs fan. Always have been, probably always will be. Things were not looking good for Les Habitants at varying times this season, and they just made it into the playoffs. But that's all that counts, right ? Thus far, I've been pleasantly surprised by their engagement with the Hurricanes. Cristobal "Hip Hip" Huet has really come into his own, just like that other goalkeeper (the one with the 30mm rotary cannon ... ). Tonite will be a pivotal game for sure ...

So, the IAEA report is in. Tehran is enriching uranium, and has given the diplomatic version of the "up yours" signal to the UN. So, what happens next ? Any thoughts ? How far is this really going to go ?

This article was too good to miss posting here. From Chicago Sun-Times Policy on Iran nukes seems to be off-target April 16, 2006 BY MARK STEYN SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST Happy Easter. Happy Passover. But, if you're like the president of Iran and believe in the coming of the "Twelfth Imam," your happy holiday may be just around the corner, too. President Ahmadinejad, who is said to consider himself the designated deputy of the "hidden Imam," held a press conference this week -- against a backdrop of doves fluttering round an atom and accompanied by dancers in orange decontamination suits doing choreographed uranium-brandishing. It looked like that Bollywood finale of ''The 40-Year-Old Virgin,'' where they all pranced around to "This Is The Dawning Of The Age Of Aquarius." As it happens, although he dresses like Steve Carell's 40-year-old virgin, the Iranian president is, in fact, a 40-year-old nuclear virgin, and he was holding a press conference to announce he was ready to blow. "Iran," he said, "has joined the group of countries which have nuclear technology" -- i.e., this is the dawning of the age of a scary us. "Our enemies cannot do a damned thing," he crowed, as an appreciative audience chanted "Death to America!" The reaction of the international community was swift and ferocious. The White House said that Iran "was moving in the wrong direction." This may have been a reference to the dancers. A simple Radio City kickline would have been better. The British Foreign Office said it was "not helpful." This may have been a reference to the doves round the atom. You know what's great fun to do if you're on, say, a flight from Chicago to New York and you're getting a little bored? Why not play being President Ahmadinejad? Stand up and yell in a loud voice, "I've got a bomb!" Next thing you know the air marshal will be telling people, "It's OK, folks. Nothing to worry about. He hasn't got a bomb." And then the second marshal would say, "And even if he did have a bomb it's highly unlikely he'd ever use it." And then you threaten to kill the two Jews in row 12 and the stewardess says, "Relax, everyone. That's just a harmless rhetorical flourish." And then a group of passengers in rows 4 to 7 point out, "Yes, but it's entirely reasonable of him to have a bomb given the threatening behavior of the marshals and the cabin crew." That's how it goes with the Iranians. The more they claim they've gone nuclear, the more U.S. intelligence experts -- oops, where are my quote marks? -- the more U.S. intelligence "experts" insist no, no, it won't be for another 10 years yet. The more they conclusively demonstrate their non-compliance with the IAEA, the more the international community warns sternly that, if it were proved that Iran were in non-compliance, that could have very grave consequences. But, fortunately, no matter how thoroughly the Iranians non-comply it's never quite non-compliant enough to rise to the level of grave consequences. You can't blame Ahmadinejad for thinking "our enemies cannot do a damned thing." It's not the world's job to prove that the Iranians are bluffing. The braggadocio itself is reason enough to act, and prolonged negotiations with a regime that openly admits it's negotiating just for the laughs only damages us further. The perfect summation of the Iranian approach to negotiations came in this gem of a sentence from the New York Times on July 13 last year: "Iran will resume uranium enrichment if the European Union does not recognize its right to do so, two Iranian nuclear negotiators said in an interview published Thursday." Got that? If we don't let Iran go nuclear, they'll go nuclear. That position might tax even the nuanced detecting skills of John Kerry. By comparison, the Tehran press has a clear-sightedness American readers can only envy. A couple of months back, the newspaper Kayhan, owned by Ayatollah Khamenei, ran an editorial called "Our Immortality And The West's Disability," with which it was hard to disagree: Even if one subscribes to the view that sanctions are a sufficient response to states that threaten to nuke their neighbors, Mohammad Jafar Behdad correctly pointed out that they would have no serious impact on Iran but would inflict greater damage on those Western economies that take them seriously (which France certainly won't). Meanwhile, the Washington Post offers the likes of Ronald D. Asmus, former deputy assistant secretary of state under President Clinton, arguing "Contain Iran: Admit Israel to NATO." "Containment" is a word that should have died with the Cold War, and certainly after the oil-for-food revelations: Aside from the minimal bang for huge numbers of bucks, you can't "contain" a state. Under the illusion of "containment," events are always moving, and usually in favor of the fellow you're trying to contain. But the idea that the way to "contain" Iran is to admit Israel to NATO elevates "containment" from an obsolescent striped-pants reflex to the realm of insanity. All the doom-mongers want to know why we went into Iraq "without a plan." Well, one reason is surely that, for a year before the invasion, the energy of the U.S. government was primarily devoted to the pointless tap-dance through the United Nations, culminating in the absurd situation of Western foreign ministers chasing each other through Africa to bend the ear of the president of Guinea, who happened to be on the Security Council that week but whose witch doctor had advised against supporting Washington. Allowing the Guinean tail to wag the French rectum of the British hindquarters of the American dog was a huge waste of resources. To go through it all again in order to prevent whichever global colossus chances to be on the Security Council this time (Haiti? The South Sandwich Islands?) from siding with the Russo-Chinese obstructionists would show that the United States had learned nothing. Bill Clinton, the Sultan of Swing, gave an interesting speech last week, apropos foreign policy: "Anytime somebody said in my presidency, 'If you don't do this, people will think you're weak,' I always asked the same question for eight years: 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?' If we can kill 'em tomorrow, then we're not weak, and we might be wise enough to try to find an alternative way." The trouble was tomorrow never came -- from the first World Trade Center attack to Khobar Towers to the African Embassy bombings to the USS Cole. Manana is not a policy. The Iranians are merely the latest to understand that.

Would these "countries" include Hamas, one wonders ? From DefenseNews Iran Says It Will Share Nuclear Technology By REUTERS, TEHRAN Iran is ready to share its nuclear technology with other countries, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said after talks on April 25 with the visiting Sudanese president, state television reported. Iran is embroiled in a nuclear standoff with the West, which fears Tehran is secretly developing atomic weapons which could be transferred to terrorist groups or spark an arms race in the Middle East. Iran insists it only wants nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as producing electricity. "The nuclear strength of the Iranian scientists is an example of several scientific currents in Iran that are going ahead, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is ready to transfer the experience, science and technology of its scientists," state television quoted Khamenei as saying. He was speaking after talks with visiting Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir. Iranian lawmaker Kamal Daneshyar, head of parliament’s energy committee, was also quoted in the daily Aftab-e Yazd as saying Iran was prepared to train other Islamic states in skills, such as enriching uranium. "Iranian nuclear scientists can easily train other Islamic countries in uranium enrichment and nuclear fuel production," he was quoted as saying. The United Nations has demanded that the Tehran halt uranium enrichment, which can produce fuel for power stations or, if uranium is enriched to far higher level, material for bombs. Iran says it will continue its enrichment work and will pursue industrial-scale production. The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is due to report to the U.N. Security Council by April 28 on whether Iran is complying with U.N. demands.

Very interesting, Pete. Glad you gamed it out. And I agree, it would be dumb for a commander to continue to close the distance with an enemy who probably has more antiship missiles, especially when he possesses greater speed. Time to bug out.

Not sure, Pete. The RGB-55 is a directional active sonobuoy, while the RGB-56 and RGB-64 are omnidirectional passive type. If RGB-NM refers to an improved or modified version of the RGB-N (and the M designator usually does), and the RGB-N is the RGB-55, then the RGB-NM might not be the RGB-64. I have, however, also seen reference to Type 75 (RGB-75, a LOFAR type) and Type 90 sonobuoys in use with the Ka-27PL.