pmaidhof

U.S. Gives Russia Info On Sub That Sank In '68 By Mike Eckel, Associated Press Moscow--U.S. military officials on Monday gave Russia a videotape and other archival materials on the Soviet K-129 submarine, whose sinking in 1968 is a lingering Cold War mystery. At a ceremony in the Far Eastern port of Vladivostok, Russia's Pacific Fleet archive and museum received copies of formerly classified documents, including two ship logs related to the K-129 incident and to U.S. efforts to salvage the sub from the sea floor in the central Pacific. Also turned over was a videotape of a secret burial at sea for six Soviet sailors whose bodies were recovered when the United States tried to salvage the sub. It was unclear whether the ceremony would help assuage persistent suspicions Russian naval officials and relatives have had about the fate of the K-129--a Golf-II class, diesel-electric submarine armed with nuclear missiles. It had 98 seamen aboard when it sank in 16,000 feet of water northwest of the Hawaiian island of Oahu on March 11, 1968. Russian officials long have suspected that the K-129 was struck by an American submarine, the USS Swordfish. But the U.S. Navy says the vessel suffered a catastrophic internal explosion. Russian doubts about the U.S. explanation re-emerged in 2000 with the sinking of the nuclear submarine Kursk. Many military officials suspected the Kursk collided with an American or British submarine. U.S. and British officials denied the allegations, but U.S. officials acknowledged that two U.S. submarines were close enough to record the sound of enormous explosions aboard the Kursk. Russian suspicions about the Swordfish were based on records indicating it underwent nighttime repair of a bent periscope at Yokosuka, Japan, on March 17, six days after the K-129 sank. Moscow has requested the Swordfish's deck logs to trace its movements. The Pentagon has explained the repairs in Japan by saying the vessel had collided with an ice pack.

1. An actual HCE release date... Had to get that in. I'll add more thoughtful ideas once I become re-familiarized with the game.

In Asia-Pacific, A New Alliance Of 4 By Richard Halloran NEW DELHI — By coincidence, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan and Adm. Timothy J. Keating, commander of U.S. forces in Asia and the Pacific, were in India at the same time last month and for the same reason — to entice India into closer security relations with their respective nations. Then President Bush, in Australia last week for an Asia-Pacific summit gathering, conferred at length with Prime Minister John Howard on Iraq and on wider issues of security in Asia. And even as they spoke, warships from Australia, India, Japan, and the U.S., plus Singapore, were training together in the Indian Ocean. Taken together, Australia, India, Japan and the U.S. are forging an informal defensive pact based on shared national interests and democratic values. An Indian commentator, Sudha Ramachandran, has called it a "quadrilateral axis of democracy" or "quad." While he was here, Abe was quoted in the Hindustan Times as saying: "A broader Asia, that broke away geographical boundaries, is now beginning to take a distinct form." He called it an "open and transparent network." China was quick to assert that the quad was an attempt to contain Beijing's influence. Chinese contended that Japan in Northeast Asia, Australia in Southeast Asia, and India in South Asia were lined up against them, with U.S. military power in the Pacific Command as backup. Senior officials in all four nations were equally quick to deny they were engaged in a concerted plot against China. Keating told reporters here: "There's no — let me emphasize no — effort on our part or any of those other countries, I'm sure, to isolate China, to put them in a closet." Indeed, each nation has sizeable trade relations with China that leaders are anxious not to jeopardize. Moreover, each has domestic political restraints that would crimp an anti-China stance. In India, for instance, nationalists rail against the possibility that India would be drawn into a security posture subordinate to the U.S. No one in authority is talking about a formal alliance like the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. Rather, officials indicated that they are building atop existing U.S.-Japan and U.S.-Australia treaties, plus newly fashioned U.S.-India security relations. Despite the constraints, leaders of the four nations have expressed concern that China's military modernization may eventually constitute a threat. They are walking on a razor's edge between engagement and deterrence as they hedge against that day. In India, another commentator, Prem Shankar Jha, has written that "epochal changes in the international order" after 9/11 include India's emergence as an economic power and a spurt in international respect for its democracy. Jha contended the major powers have felt a need "to broaden the base of the informal consensus among larger countries to cope with the progressive disintegration of the international order, the spread of new threats that require collective action, the rapid decline of U.S. hegemony, and its need for friends after its misadventure in Iraq." For its part, India has been lessening its reliance on Russia for weapons; remains unhappy with China's alliance with its archrival, Pakistan; and still has border disputes with China. Indian leaders have expressed unease over China's gradually increasing presence around the Indian Ocean. In Australia, Minister of Defense Brendan Nelson justified Canberra's reliance on collective defense in a recent speech. He noted that dangers from weapons of mass destruction, the prospect of failing states, and transnational crime and terror required joint action. He was worried that the U.S. would turn to isolationism after Iraq. Nelson said his nation of 20 million people was limited in providing for its own security. "We need to work with other people," he said. Collective defense, however, must be realistic, not just for show and talk. Australians, he said, "are pragmatic. We don't generally believe in traveling dinner clubs." In Japan, strategic thinkers have pointed to open hostility from North Korea, barely concealed hostility from South Korea, and anxiety over long-term threats from China despite recent moves by Beijing to reduce the antagonism. Tokyo has begun to enhance its modest self-defense force and to revise its constitution to permit Japan to take part in a collective defense. Nonetheless, for the foreseeable future, Japan will remain dependent on the U.S. for much of its conventional and for its entire nuclear defense. For the U.S. Pacific Command, the guideline for collective action set by several recent commanders has been: "No nation is so big it can go it alone, and no nation is too small to contribute." Richard Halloran is a Honolulu-based journalist and former New York Times correspondent in Asia.

Pacific Armadas Growing Far East Navies Mean New Challenges For U.S. By Arthur Herman SOMETHING new and menacing has entered the blue waters of the Pacific Ocean, and it's not the great white shark. On Aug. 23, Japan launched its first aircraft carrier since World War Two. The Hyuga only displaces 13,500 tons, compared to the 100,000 tons of an American Nimitz-class behemoth, and it will only carry 11 or so SH-60 anti-submarine helicopters instead of the 90 aircraft and choppers on the USS Nimitz or Eisenhower - at least for now. But as Richard Dorn, naval analyst at the U.S.-based AMI International, notes, "it cannot be denied that the launch of Hyuga is targeted at carrying Harriers [vertical-take-off fighters] or F-35's in the future" - and Japan is planning to build another three just like it. In fact, the Hyuga marks a growing trend among Asia's navies - a trend that Americans need to monitor closely. * India plans to have no less than four operational aircraft carriers by 2017. * Thailand already has one, the Chakri Naruebet. * Singapore's navy has four amphibious transport docks that can be converted into homes for anti-sub helicopters or vertical-take-off aircraft like the Harrier. * Australia has no plans for a new carrier (its last one was decommissioned in 1982). But this month Royal Australian Air Force instructors will start learning to land their F/A-18s on American carrier decks - a major step toward making the RAAF a power at sea as well as on land. Many analysts see all this taking to the air as countermeasures to the alarming growth of China's navy over the last decade, especially its submarine fleet (which is now nearly equal in number, if not in quality, to our own). They note that the navies of four Asian powers - Japan, Singapore, India and Australia - have joined the Americans in anti-submarine exercises off India's Malabar coast this week to send a clear signal to Asia's fast-growing naval power. But this is by no means the full story. Two years ago, naval experts agreed that the Chinese were concentrating on building subs and had no interest in aircraft carriers. But now China has announced it will build two carriers by 2015 in cooperation with the Russians - who in turn announced in June that in 2010 they'll start building a new nuclear-powered carrier of 50,000 tons to join their existing carrier, the Admiral Kuznetzov. WHAT we are seeing are Asian navies taking to heart the lessons of seapower - and of the aircraft carrier, even a diminutive one, as the power projector par excellence. Fed by a resurgent nationalism that had been suppressed during the Cold War, the struggle for the mastery of the Pacific is underway. Like continental Europe after the Napoleonic Wars, Asia's economies are growing, many (like China and India) at 8 percent a year or more. And their middle classes are growing - producing and using an ever-larger share of the world's GDP. These nations not only have money to spend on projecting national power through their navies (seven of the world's 12 biggest navies face onto the Pacific), but they have vital interests to protect. As in 19th century Europe, these trends will summon up huge creative energies but also the potential for great destruction - and America will have to help to make sure the first doesn't set the stage for the other. CHINA now has the world's second- larg est navy - but it also has big interests to protect. By 2020, it will need more than 900 million tons of rice a year to feed its billion-plus population, yet even the most optimistic forecasts see its domestic production as rising to no more than 615 million tons. There is also China's growing thirst for natural gas and oil, which gives it a huge stake in protecting the vital sea lanes through which Asia gets its fossil fuels. The same is true of India and Japan. With Japan's economy now second only to the United States' in size, its navy has increasingly had to drop the fiction that it is merely a Maritime Self-Defense Force (the official name), in favor of creating a "blue water" capacity - that is, an ability to operate trans-oceanically in cooperation with the United States or even (as the Hyuga indicates) on its own. INDIA'S naval buildup - pushed by its ultra-na tional Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party - has been based on the lessons it learned about seapower from its original teacher, Britain's Royal Navy. The Indian Navy's motto even has distinct echoes of the age of Drake and Nelson: "He who controls the sea is all-powerful." Since 97 percent of India's foreign trade is seaborne, it is no surprise that by 2020 its navy will have grown to 185 ships, including at least four aircraft carriers. RUSSIA, too, faces the same push for national self-assertion combined with the need to protect its interests in the Pacific. Next year, nearly a quarter of of its $192 billion defense budget will go for new ships. Its naval commander-in-chief, Adm. Vladimir Masorin, confidently predicts Russia will have the world's second-largest fleet in 20 years' time - just as it did in the Cold War. Will the new national energies in Asia help to build a new world order, or will they trigger a ruthless competition for resources and empire, much as those of 19th century Europe triggered World War One? To a large extent, the answer is up to the U.S. Navy, which is still the largest but also the most flexible and versatile in the world. THIS is why Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and former Chief of Naval Operations, has been a steady champion of the concept of a "1,000-ship navy" - that is, a U.S. fleet effectively enlarged by close cooperation with allied navies like Japan and India and Australia, and even potential rivals like China. The goal is not only a force multiplier for our own navy in a time of shrinking naval budgets. The 1,000-ship navy will also have to become the glue that holds the global economic system together - both by protecting the world's sea lanes (over which 95 percent of the weight of international trade still travels) and by preventing the clash of interests (including our own) in places like the Pacific from triggering a world crisis involving nuclear-armed powers like Russia, China, and India. Americans may not like being globocops. As we see in Iraq, the costs can be severe. But the alternatives are even riskier. And as the struggle for mastery of the Pacific heats up, we will need a strong, flexible Navy more than ever. Arthur Herman's most recent book is "To Rule the Waves: How the British Navy Shaped the Modern World."

India to launch BrahMos from Russian sub By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI - Staff writer Posted : Sunday Sep 9, 2007 9:36:17 EDT NEW DELHI — India’s supersonic cruise missile BrahMos, built jointly with Russia, is ready to be launched from a submarine, Defence Minister A.K. Anthony reportedly told the Indian Parliament on Sept. 5. Currently, the Indian navy’s submarines do not have the capability to launch BrahMos missiles. Sources in the Indian Defence Ministry said the BrahMos will be tested on an unspecified Russian submarine later this year. Versions of the BrahMos have been developed for the Indian army, navy and air force. The air version will be integrated on IL-38 maritime surveillance aircraft and the SU 30 MKI multirole aircraft. BrahMos has a range of 300 kilometers. The BrahMos cruise missile has been jointly developed by the BrahMos Corp., a joint venture between India's Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO) and Russia's NPO Mashinostroeyenia. Find Navy Times article here.

Not certain how I forgot, but the current Issue #32 (Tony - did you ever get it?) of The Naval Sitrep includes an article India's Barak Refits. The article while nominally about the outfitting of the Israeli Barak-1 for point missile defense onto INS ships, includes Data entries for CVH Viraat (ex-HMS Hermes), Type-15 Delhi DDG, Kashin II DDG, Type-16A Bramaputra FF, and Type 16 Godavari. Interestingly, the Kashin II remarks inlcudes: "2003: Rajput fitted as test ship for PJ-10 Brahmos (use SS-N-26 stats), with PS&PB(2)2 Brahmos vice 2 SS-N-2."

Looks as if war weariness has set in on the belligerents. Let's hope that during the lull they resupplying and rearming for another vicious clash.

Israeli Jets In 'Iran-Attack Drill' Over Syria By Post Wire Services JERUSALEM - Israeli warplanes may have been testing air routes for a possible attack against Iran when they were fired on by Syrian forces, experts said yesterday. The official Syrian Arab News Agency Thursday quoted a military official as saying that Israeli jets broke the sound barrier flying over northern Syria earlier in the day, then "dropped munitions" onto deserted areas after being shot at by Syria's air defenses. Israel's air force may have been testing an air path to Iran, in case it decides to carry out an attack against that country's nuclear facilities, analysts said. The corridor of northern Syria over which the aircraft allegedly flew is the closest straight line from the Mediterranean Sea, where Israel has easy access, to Iran. Israel says it prefers to let the international community confront Iran's nuclear ambitions, but a lone Israeli attack is not out of the question. "Of course Israel wants to let the Americans do that," said Ephraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies. "But if we are left alone, the Israeli army is preparing to deal with the Iranian nuclear threat - if the political level allows it to - and this could have been a part of that."

Well...so much for a "series".

Russia, Indonesia Set $1 Billion Arms Deal Moscow Seen Trying to Boost Clout in Asia By Peter Finn, Washington Post Foreign Service MOSCOW, Sept. 6 -- During a one-day visit to Indonesia on Thursday, President Vladimir Putin witnessed the signing of a $1 billion arms deal that many analysts here see as part of a broader Russian effort to restore diplomatic and military clout in the Asia-Pacific region and make some money, as well. Indonesia, which until 2005 was under a U.S. arms embargo because of human rights abuses, will purchase Russian tanks, military helicopters and submarines. Last month, Russia said it would sell six fighter jets to Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, as part of the deal. "The deals signed in Indonesia are part of a Kremlin strategy to expand its influence in Asia and the Middle East," said Alexei Makarkin, an analyst at the Center for Political Technologies in Moscow. "Russia is trying to pursue a multipolar policy in the world and considers itself to be one of its poles." But unlike the former Soviet Union, he added, today's Kremlin is willing to ship arms only "to those countries who can pay." Russia is helping Indonesia do that by providing a $1 billion line of credit, repayable over 15 years. Weighed down with foreign debt in the 1990s, Russia now has the world's second-largest foreign currency reserves after China because of soaring prices for its vast stores of oil and natural gas. "We agreed to develop our cooperation in energy, mining, aviation and the telecommunications sector," said Putin, who stopped in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, on his way to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Australia. "There's also a good perspective in defense and military." For Indonesia, the country's defense minister said, the deal comes with none of the strings that encumber similar purchases from the United States and Western Europe. "Requirements for purchasing arms from Western countries are complicated, with preconditions attached, such as human rights, accountability, not to mention licensing," Juwono Sudarsono told reporters in Jakarta. "In our past experience with Britain, we were not allowed to use Scorpion tanks in Aceh, even though we were facing armed separatists." In 2005, a peace agreement between rebels and the government ended three decades of conflict in that province. Since the lifting of the U.S. embargo later that year, Indonesia has mostly obtained spare parts and technical support from the United States, once its primary arms supplier. Sudarsono said Thursday that he was glad to be able to "reduce dependence on the United States." Under Putin, Russia has become determined to project its military, diplomatic and energy power into the Pacific, an area it neglected after the fall of the Soviet Union. Besides the arms deal, Russian companies have signed billions of dollars worth of deals in the mining and energy sectors with Indonesian companies, Russian officials said. This year, Putin signed a $200 billion, seven-year rearmament plan for Russia's military. The package includes money for the Pacific Fleet, a major Pacific submarine base and new land- and sea-based intercontinental missiles. Last month, Russia resumed global patrols by its long-range strategic bombers, sending two of them far across Pacific Ocean waters to the vicinity of Guam island, site of a major U.S. base. On Thursday, Britain and Norway scrambled jets to trail Russian bombers conducting the new patrols. The Russian Defense Ministry described the flights by eight strategic bombers as a "routine exercise" and said that although the aircraft had encountered planes from NATO countries, there were "no incidents." Last month, Russia conducted a joint military exercise with China, one of its major arms customers. And it has made or is negotiating other arms deals across Asia, including with India, Malaysia, Burma and Vietnam. Some observers remain skeptical that Russia will become a major competitor of the United States and, increasingly, China for influence in the region. "In my view, what is happening is that when certain rough edges appear in relations between the USA and such countries as Malaysia or Indonesia, Russia immediately makes an attempt to squeeze in and fill this gap," said Alexander Golts, a military analyst and journalist in Moscow. "Its policy is developing these kind of niches. But we can hardly talk about any serious influence." After a meeting, Putin and Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono said they had discussed Iraq, North Korea and Iran, among other subjects, and they obliquely criticized the Bush administration's approach to global issues. "The two presidents strongly believe that international and regional conflicts . . . should be settled by peaceful means," they said in a joint statement. "The use of force is admissible as the last resort and only in accordance with the United Nations charter."

Serbia Says Use Of Force Is An Option In Kosovo By Nicholas Wood BELGRADE, Serbia, Sept. 5 — Serbia is ready to use force to prevent Western states from recognizing Kosovo as an independent state, a senior Serbian official warned on Wednesday. Dusan Prorokovic, Serbia’s state secretary for Kosovo, outlined an array of tough measures to squeeze Kosovo that he said Serbia was ready to take in the event that Kosovo’s Albanian-dominated government declared independence and was recognized by Western governments. These included the possible deployment of Serbian forces to the province, the sealing of its borders, and a trade embargo. The potential steps are the harshest outlined so far by the government here and come as negotiations between the sides overseen by Russia, the European Union and the United States appear to be deadlocked. The United Nations has set a Dec. 10 deadline for the conclusion of the talks, after which the United States has indicated it would recognize Kosovo unilaterally. International officials in Kosovo, regional analysts and Albanian politicians have repeatedly stated that a return of Serbian troops would prompt a renewed conflict in the region. Until now, Serbia has shied away from making any threats that could associate it with the repressive response by its security forces to an ethnic Albanian insurgency during the 1990s, when Slobodan Milosevic was the president of Yugoslavia. In an interview in the Serbian capital, Mr. Prorokovic warned that unilateral recognition by Western states would give Serbia the right to return its troops to the province, and to annul an eight-year agreement between NATO and what was then the Yugoslav government regulating the troops’ exclusion. Mr. Prorokovic is also a senior member of Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica’s Serbian Democratic party. “In case of self-proclamation, it is not an active paper anymore,” Mr. Prorokovic said, referring to the agreement, known as the Kumanovo military accord. “Without Kumanovo, our army can go back without any legal limits,” he said. “It can cross the boundary and go everywhere in Kosovo without any legal problems.” Serb-dominated forces were forced to withdraw from Kosovo in June 1999 after a 78-day NATO-led bombing campaign. Since then, the United Nations has administered the province. United Nations officials estimate that up to 10,000 ethnic Albanians lost their lives in the conflict. Mr. Prorokovic said the redeployment of the Serbian Army was one of up to 16 options Serbia was considering if Kosovo declared independence. He also reinforced his government’s stance that continued talks on Kosovo’s future was the only option worth considering. “We do not have an alternative,” he said. If Kosovo’s Albanian leaders proceed with their plans to declare unilateral independence at the end of current talks, Mr. Prorokovic said, Serbia will initiate a trade embargo on the province, which relies on Serbia for much of its imports, and seal its boundaries with Serbia. “We will block every kind of commercial activity, and every kind of route,” he said. The warning comes ahead of the public announcement on Monday of terms of a detailed package offered to the ethnic Albanians in Vienna last week. An adviser to Kosovo’s prime minister, Agim Ceku, said Mr. Prorokovic’s statement would not deter Kosovo’s Albanian leadership from seeking recognition after negotiations finish in December. “How do they walk over NATO troops in the region, and what do they do when they are exposed to open conflict?” said Borut Grgic, a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Ceku. “Occupation is out of the question. The international community would block it.” But Mr. Grgic conceded that the region was at risk of renewed tension by the end of the year as Kosovo’s Albanian leaders move closer to proclaiming a state. One leading political commentator in Belgrade said Serbia’s increasingly tough stance on Kosovo, bolstered by Russia’s refusal to accept recognition of the province within the United Nations Security Council, may test the resolve of European states that are divided over Kosovo’s future. The Serbs “know that security is not fantastic in Kosovo. In a way, they are threatening the others,” said Bratislav Grubacic, editor of the VIP news agency. Several European states have said they will not recognize Kosovo as an independent state without a United Nations resolution.

From chat tonight. Discussing how use of Brahmos, or even SS-N-25 Switchblade equipped ships vs a SS-N-22 Sunburn equipped ship (see Shipwreck Indian Russian Engagement thread), it boils down to if the target gets detected by scouting helos, survival is based on its short ranged SAMs and countermeasures Sea King Mk.42 carries a Super Searcher. Detects a Medium target at 115nm. Radar horizon reduces that to 108nm if helo is at Medium Alt. Sovremennyy Mod carries F/A(1)2 Yozh Sa-N-7b w/ 24 Grizzly. Top Plate B 3D detects the large target at 160nm, reduced to 110nm due to RLOS. So each detects one another at roughly 109nm. Sa-N-7b has effective air range of 13.9nm. Brahmos has advertised effective range of 300km, or equaling about 162nm. Might be stating the obvious, but once spotted, it boils down to your countermeasures. And the chance of getting swamped is pretty high I guess that's why everyone wants to get stealthy, which leads to IR guidance, that leads to reducing IR signature...and so on. Moral of the story is do not get detected.

Apparently Brahmos is a development of the Russian P-800 Onyx (Oniks) Yakhont 3M55. NATO designation SS-N-26. Until some stat arrive on Brahmos, I'll use Yakhont in its stead.

Per the manufacturer...yeah right, 3x speed of a convention subsonic long range ASM Brahmos

Supersonic cruise missile, hmm. And already being slapped on Rajput DDG's. That's convenient for the scenario.

And you knew this was coming...Stats/equivelent missile? And on whose side...It's a joint Russian-Indian project.

Here is a summary of a small Indian-Russian engagement started yesterday. It is not yet complete, but the Russian side needs to determine how to proceed from where it is now. Situation: Indian Ocean. INS Delhi (Type-15 DDG), and INS Rajput (Kashin- Mod DDG) are providing protection to INS Jalashva (former USS Trenton LPD) during movement from India to unnamed islands to the SW. A Russian naval force consisting of Admiral Chabanenko (Udaloy II DDG) and Burnyy (Sovremenny DDG) has been ordered to stop the Indian force from off-loading the LPD. The engagement starts out with Sea King Mk.42’s and Ka-27 Helix’s scouting out forward of their respective forces with active SS radars. Both task groups maintain EMCON. The Russian helos were the first to detect the opposing force, but due to the relative short legs of the SS-N-22 Sunburn had to still maneuver their ships into a firing position. The Indian Sea King detected the Udaloy II soon after, and INS Delhi passively detected the searching Helix as well. With the Sea Kings detection, INS Delhi launched its second Sea King and fired up its radar as well. The passive detection of the Russian scout helo, and a solid fix of the Udaloy II from three radar platforms prompted the Indian commander to unleash 8x SS-N-25 Switchblade sea skimming anti-ship missiles. Based on the missile alert from a Helix, the Russian force emergency activates its radars. The Udaloy II initially only detects three incoming missiles. As the raid travels from its launch platform to its target, it is sequentially engaged by SAMs from both Russian ships (SA-N-9’s, SA-N-11’s and SA-7’s) as well as the Udaloy II 130mm gun mount. SA-N-7’s and SA-N-9’s all miss, as does the gun mount. SA-N-11’s take out only two of the attacking Switchblades. Admiral Chabanenko fires off his chaff which seduces four of the attackers. Two crash immediately into the sea while the other two unsuccessfully attempt to lock onto Burnyy, a distant 10nm away, and crash into the sea. The first of the remaining two switchblades rolls a “10” on a D10 which is an automatic miss. The second and final switchblade rolls a “1” for a hit. For a “medium” missile such as the Switchblade, there is only a 10% chance that the hit will be critical enough to sink a ship of a Udaloy II’s (5,500-10,000 ton displacement) size. The subsequent damage roll is again a “1”. The missile apparently finds the ship’s magazine, exploding Admiral Chabanenko into an enormous fireball. The concussion and heat felt on the grim faces found on the bridge of Burnyy. Ironically translated from the Russian as Fiery. First lesson learned here is the differing ranges of the SS-N-22 and SS-N-25. The Russians are all Sunburn, while now that Delhi has launched all of its Switchblades, the battle, if the Russians continue it will be Sunburns versus SS-N-2D Styx carried by the Rajput. Already, the Indian commander has odered the Rajput to assume the lead, with Delhi dropping back to provide AAW coverage to Jalashva. Pretty cool.

Noted. Break..., Break..., Request to moderator - please move at least these two ill-directed messages. Msg #2007 Msg #2036 Thanks

Where would you prefer articles/information about Indian Ocean (READ: India) air/naval issues be posted? Middle East/Africa and Pacific Rim do not seem entirely appropriate to cover the Indian Navy, Chinese encroachment, the flow of oil to both of these entities, Pakistan vs India, Sri Lanka vs itself, etc. Could/Should there be another folder option? Thanks

Indian communists protest U.S. naval exercises By Ashok Sharma - The Associated Press Posted : Tuesday Sep 4, 2007 7:19:35 EDT NEW DELHI — Dozens of communists chanted anti-U.S. slogans as they left an eastern Indian city Tuesday for the site of a naval exercise involving India, the U.S. and three other countries, a party official said. “The fight against imperialism will continue,” about 80 party workers in Calcutta shouted as they boarded buses for Vishakhapatnam, a southern port city near the venue of the exercise, set to begin hours later. Twenty-five warships from India, the U.S., Australia, Japan and Singapore are participating in the four-day drill in the Bay of Bengal, said Capt. V.K. Garg, the Indian navy spokesman. Another group of party workers was scheduled to leave Wednesday for Chennai, the capital of Tamil Nadu state, for Vishakhapatnam, where a protest rally is scheduled Saturday. “An attempt to bind India to the United States on foreign policy would not be acceptable,” said a statement from the Communist Party of India (Marxist). The party’s support is crucial for the survival of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s government. Along with its objections to the naval drills, the party is leading the opposition to a landmark India-U.S. nuclear pact, which it says could undermine India’s nuclear weapons program and independent foreign policy. The deal lets the U.S. send nuclear fuel and technology to booming but energy-starved India, which has been cut off from international atomic markets for the past three decades by its refusal to sign nonproliferation accords and its testing of nuclear weapons. Adm. Timothy J. Keating, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, praised the developing military relationship between the U.S. and India, describing it last month as “solid, good and improving steadily.” “We are engaging in exercises, exchange of personnel and we are working on disaster relief assistance,” he said during his visit to the Indian capital of New Delhi. Navy Times article.

Navy Times Video

Navy can use sonar despite environmental fight By Paul Elias - The Associated Press Posted : Friday Aug 31, 2007 18:04:17 EDT SAN FRANCISCO — The Navy can use high-power sonar during exercises off the Southern California coast, despite the technology’s threat to whales and other marine mammals, a federal appeals court ruled Friday. National security interests outweigh the possible harm to marine life, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined in overturning a judge’s order banning the practice. “The public does indeed have a very considerable interest in preserving our natural environment and especially relatively scarce whales,” Judge Andrew Kleinfeld wrote for the majority. “But it also has an interest in national defense. We are currently engaged in war, in two countries.” Judge Milan Smith Jr. disagreed, saying he would have kept the ban in place in part because the Natural Resources Defense Council is likely to win its lawsuit to stop the use of sonar. The ruling allows the Navy to use the high-power sonar in 11 planned training exercises. Cara Horowitz, an attorney for the Santa Monica-based resources defense council, said she was “somewhat disappointed” by the ruling Friday, but remained confident the lawsuit would quickly succeed in shutting down the sonar program off the Southern California coast. The appeals court said in its Friday ruling that it wanted to resolve the lawsuit quickly and Horowitz was hopeful that the Navy will be able to undertake most of the 11 planned exercises. She said the next planned exercise is in September. The council’s lawsuit alleges that the Navy’s sonar causes whales to beach themselves among other environmental harms. The Navy maintains it already minimizes risks to marine life. It has monitored the ocean off Southern California for the 40 years it has employed sonar without seeing any whale injuries. A Department of Justice attorney didn’t return a telephone call Friday. Navy officials, who had asked the court to overturn the district court’s verdict, were pleased. Adm. Robert Willard, who commands the U.S. Pacific Fleet, had noted that the initial injunction “left us in an untenable position of having strike groups needing this training and not being able to accomplish it.” The appellate court’s ruling allows the Navy to resume use of the active sonar — which service officials contend is needed to help detect modern diesel-electric submarines that could pose national security threats — for training, especially within its vast ranges off Southern California. “The ability to detect and track potentially hostile submarines is a critical skill that cannot be duplicated in the classroom or by simulation,” a Pacific Fleet spokesman, Capt. Scott Gureck, said in a statement. “Today’s ruling allows us to resume active sonar training for our carrier and expeditionary strike groups,” Gureck said. “These integrated sonar training exercises are absolutely essential for our strike groups to conduct before they deploy to the Western Pacific, the Middle East and around the world.” Staff writer Gidget Fuentes contributed to this report. Find Navy Times article here.

Enter the Russians. Last night paintings included 5x Sovremenny DDG's, 3x Neustrashimy FF, 2x Udaloy II DDG, and 1x Tu-95 Bear-D. The beauty of this batch, particularly the Sovremenny, is that many OPFORs can be depicted - Russia, China, and hey at 1/6000 it can even by mistaken for an Indian Type 15 Dehli Class destroyer. Pics of these, and the subs from a while back, hopefully to be taken, transferred, and posted this weekend.

China, Japan Set Naval Port Calls At Defense Talks By Associated Press TOKYO -- Chinese military growth isn't aimed at threatening any state, China's defense chief said in Tokyo on Thursday, as he stressed that Beijing was working to become more transparent about defense matters. Chinese Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan's assertions came as the two sides agreed on reciprocal port calls by navy ships, with a Chinese warship to visit Japan as early as November, for the first time since World War II, Japanese defense officials said. Mr. Cao met with senior Japanese officials and made a speech as part of his five-day visit to Japan, which began Wednesday and is aimed at reversing a freeze in defense contacts and improving ties. The visit, the first by a Chinese defense chief to Japan in nearly a decade, comes amid concerns in Japan about China's military buildup. Tokyo has expressed alarm at the pace of Chinese defense spending and the lack of transparency in Beijing's military budget. Mr. Cao insisted in his speech to Japanese defense officials and lawmakers that China's military growth wasn't aimed at any country or people, and he reiterated Beijing's stance that China would never use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states, a group that includes Japan. Earlier Thursday, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told Mr. Cao that greater transparency in defense matters on China's part would help Beijing play an important role in Asian security, Japan's Foreign Ministry said in a statement. Mr. Cao responded by inviting Japanese observers to attend military exercises China plans to conduct in mid-September, it said. In separate talks, Japanese Defense Minister Masahiko Komura also urged that China disclose more details about its military budget. The two sides agreed to launch a working group to discuss possibly setting up a telephone hot line between their armies. The U.S. and China are also considering a similar hot line.

Building A Modern Arsenal In India By Heather Timmons and Somini Sengupta NEW DELHI, Aug. 30 — India is developing a military appetite to match its growing economic power. Over the next five years, military analysts expect the country to spend as much as $40 billion on weapons procurement alone, more than its entire annual armaments budget today — upgrading systems as diverse as jet fighters, artillery, submarines and tanks in its largely Soviet-era arsenal. As a result, India will become one of the largest military markets in the world. For American contractors, which had been shut out of India for decades, the surge in demand comes just as relations between Washington and New Delhi reach a new level of warmth. In terms of “potential for growth, India is our top market, ” said Richard G. Kirkland, Lockheed Martin’s president for South Asia. But whether United States companies can turn that potential into profits will depend on more than warm relations between officials in their capitals; it will depend on how they finesse the particular challenges of the new market — especially, competition from their Russian counterparts. The stakes of the contest were underscored this week when the Indian defense ministry called for bids to fill an order for 126 fighter jets, a contract that could be worth $10.2 billion. Determined to build a domestic arms industry, India is requiring foreign suppliers to make a sizable portion of any military goods in this country. In the case of the jet fighter contract, the successful bidder must produce goods worth half the contract’s value in India. So, the American companies have been busily pairing up with locals. So far, most partnerships are little more than agreements to collaborate on future projects. In February, Raytheon and the electronics division of the Indian giant Tata Power signed such an agreement. The same month, Boeing signed an accord with an Indian engineering firm, Larsen & Toubro, to develop new projects. And Northrop Grumman has signed on with Bharat Electronics and Dynamatic Technologies, both of Bangalore, to investigate joint opportunities. The Americans’ interest in India goes beyond weapons. This country has booming markets in commercial aviation, shipping and infrastructure projects, which means opportunities for the logistics and security units of the big American contractors. Walter F. Doran, the president of Raytheon Asia, and a former commander of the Navy’s Pacific fleet, predicts that India may be “one of our largest, if not our largest, growth partner over the next decade or so.” The hefty increase in military spending reflects the country’s changing view of itself. India, like “all aspiring nations, is seeking its place on the world’s stage,” Adm. Sureesh Mehta, chief of staff of the Indian Navy, told thousands of white-suited officers at a naval conference in New Delhi in July. In particular, India is positioning itself as a policeman of nearby waterways, especially the Indian Ocean. A spokesman for the defense ministry, Sitanshu Kar, said: “If you look at the rim from west Asia to Asia-Pacific, that entire area accounts for over 70 percent of the traffic of the petroleum products for the whole world. We have a role to play to ensure that these sea lanes are secure.” An American carrier, the Trenton, which the Indian Navy bought and renamed the Jalashva, can, for example, carry 450 soldiers and half a dozen helicopters, and be used to evacuate Indian nationals, deliver aid or intervene in conflict areas. Yet India is virgin territory for American armaments makers. Decades of cold war-era distrust, when India aligned itself much of the time with the Soviet Union; followed by sanctions that President Clinton imposed after India tested nuclear weapons in 1998, made India a sort of no-go area for American companies. Under the Bush administration, sanctions have been lifted and military ties have deepened. In July, the two governments announced a commercial nuclear energy agreement. Under the accord, the United States will share nuclear technology with India, including fuel. The deal requires a radical, India-specific exception to American law and underscores the Bush administration’s commitment, made two years ago, to help India become “a major world power.” But many arms industry analysts say that winning big orders in India will still be a challenge for Americans. In many cases, companies will be competing directly against India’s traditional supplier, Russia, which has manufacturing agreements in place and is still the largest supplier. Though relations unraveled after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, they were repaired in the late ’90s and the two countries are negotiating some $10 billion in contracts, including an Indian air defense system. “The Russians are going to get quite a bit of this business,” Andrew Brookes, an aerospace analyst at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, predicted. Congress could present another hurdle for American companies; lawmakers could prohibit sale of the most advanced military equipment, Mr. Brookes said, while there is a perception that the Russians will “sell first-rate stuff.” Nonetheless, Americans are winning some deals. Lockheed Martin is in final talks to sell six C-130J cargo planes for $1 billion. It would be the largest American military sale to India to date. The defense ministry has asked Lockheed and Boeing to bid on the $10.2 billion jet order, as well as Saab, which makes the Gripen fighter, and the European team building the Eurofighter jet. They will all confront the MIG Russian Aircraft Corporation, which owns the developer of the MIG, the jet that the Indian Air Force now flies. In general, the Russians have been the most discreet of suitors. At the recent naval conference here, Western companies took out booths, sponsored meals and cocktail hours, and had dozens of their name-tagged employees working the crowd. Several representatives from the United States armed services also glad-handed. But a Russian presence was hard to find. Maj. Gen. Aleksandr A. Burov, military attaché at the Russian Embassy in New Delhi, said in a telephone interview that he could not comment on any commercial deals. He did make a point of noting that the chief of Russian land forces had recently visited India, stopping in Agra and Goa. Several calls and a faxed message to an embassy number that General Burov said would lead to someone who could answer questions went unanswered, as did calls to the New Delhi office of MIG Russian Aircraft. In some parts of the Indian military, officers split along generational lines, some American officers who interact regularly with the Indian military said. Older officers are likely to support purchases from Russia; younger ones may prefer buying from the United States. The recent nuclear agreement with the United States also complicates the situation of American companies. The agreement has been strongly criticized in some corners, reflecting an undercurrent of continued distrust in this country toward the United States — which is still seen by many, mostly because of past relations, as wanting to squelch India’s rise to global prominence. Some politicians say that India made too many concessions to Washington to get the deal and that these will restrict its nuclear testing. To take effect, the agreement will require legislation by the United States Congress. The recent improvement in relations with the Pentagon has generated controversy in other ways. At the beginning of July, when the American aircraft carrier Nimitz made a port call near the southern city of Chennai, formerly Madras, it was met by fiery protests from port workers and politicians. The defense ministry insists that economics, not politics, will guide its decisions. Speaking of the jet fighter deal, its spokesman, Mr. Kar, said, “We’re strictly going by two considerations — the operations requirements of the air force and the best price we get.” American manufacturers, not surprisingly, maintain that Western technology would be an improvement over the Russian planes and weapons systems that Indians use now or could buy. Switching to Western equipment would allow the military to “bring new technology to bear faster, with more precision,” Mr. Kirkland of Lockheed said. If the Indian Air Force chose Lockheed’s fighter, he said, it would be able to conduct joint exercises with the United States Air Force and the forces of 18 other countries that fly the plane. Still, American contractors have no illusions about their Russian competitors. “It’s difficult to unseat an incumbent,” said Randy Belote, a spokesman for Northrop Grumman.