Herman
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Herman
-
-
31st Scenario posted this year!
Freek Schepers has released his latest creation. This is scenario also uses the Colonial Wars database edited by Paul Bridge. Some players might actually still be able to remember the Indonesian crisis as the world held its breath.
OPERATION JAYA WIJAYA
When Indonesia became independent in 1949, The Netherlands held onto New Guinea, a vast island group in the east of the archipelago. The Netherlands maintained permanent army (KNIL), navy, and air force units on the islands. In the early 1960s, President Soekarno started guerrilla operations against the British in Malaysia and against the Dutch in New Guinea to force them to relinquish their colonies. Indonesia built up its military with modern Russian weapons and, in 1961, Indonesia had the strongest air force in the Southern Hemisphere while The Netherlands post-war economic position had allowed it only limited military investments.
A visit of the Dutch aircraft carrier "Karel Doorman" to the region in 1961 inflamed the situation and serious incidents started the next year. In March of 1962, Dutch patrol planes sank an Indonesian Schooner and, in July, Dutch destroyers sank the Indonesian torpedo-boat Matjan Tutul carrying soldiers to New Guinea. Dutch Neptunes intercepted and shot down some of the Mitchell bombers and Dakotas dropping paras in company strength in the jungle. During the summer, a bloody guerrilla war started between these para's and Dutch Marines in the jungle of New Guinea.
Politically, the Soviet Union was rattling its sabre in Cuba, Vietnam, and gave overt support to Indonesia (including supplying crews to Indonesia's newly built submarines). President Kennedy was very worried about the threat of Soviet influence in Indonesia with its strategic sea lanes. The Dutch Prime minister de Quai and his foreign minister Luns refused to negotiate with Soekarno and tried to make New Guinea a UN-protectorate only to face a Russian veto.
Finally, in August of 1962, Soekarno gave orders for the liberation of New Guinea by force through operation Jaya Wijaya. Merchant ships and the Indonesian navy formed up east of the Celebes and the Indonesian Air Force was deployed to forward bases. Still, the newly formed Indonesian navy faced a small, though battle-hardened Dutch navy. The operation was by no means a sure thing. This changed when Russia deployed Badger bombers and long-range submarines and dressed up their crews as Indonesian 'volunteers'. The Netherlands had good intelligence, Dutch submarines had crossed the Pacific, and, for the first time in decades, the Netherlands sent conscript troops to defend the colonies.
On August 18th, Prime Minister de Quai gave in under severe pressure from President Kennedy and agreed to hand over New Guinea to Indonesia later that year. This scenario investigates what would have happened if the Netherlands would have let the conflict erupt. Soekarno had already ordered his invasion fleet to sail from the Celebes and, although some sources maintain Soekarno had not yet achieved the 3:1 superiority in forces required, the Russian forces would have played a decisive role in the battle.
Author: Freek Schepers
Check it out at either the StrategyZone File Archives or
-
Airborne Mine-Detection System Enters Production
Source: Northrop Grumman
Jun. 17, 2005
The US Navy has announced that the Northrop Grumman (Melbourne, FL) airborne laser mine-detection system has reached Milestone C – signifying the end of system development and demonstration – and is now poised to enter its production phase.
The airborne laser mine-detection system uses light-detection and ranging technology to detect, classify, and localize floating and near-surface moored sea mines so that ships can maneuver through clear sea lanes. Contained in external equipment pods mounted on a Navy MH-60S helicopter, the mine-detection system also provides mine-location information for follow-on neutralization by other systems such as Northrop Grumman's rapid airborne mine-clearance system.
The mine-detection system will support the mine-warfare mission module for the Navy's Littoral Combat Ship to provide airborne mine defense to the battle force. The program is managed out of PMS 495, Naval Sea Systems Command, under the leadership of the Program Executive Office, Littoral and Mine Warfare.
The mine-detection system is one of five airborne mine-countermeasures systems planned for use on the MH-60S helicopter. It also has been qualified for mounting on other MH-60 series aircraft.
-
Subs: Cold War tool or future need?
By Shir Haberman
PORTSMOUTH - One of the primary justifications for placing Portsmouth Naval Shipyard on the base closure list this year is the reduction in the number of submarines the Navy expects to use in the future.
"In the past, we had 100 attack submarines. Now, it’s in the 50s, and in the future there will be 41," Adm. Vern Clark, chief of Naval operations, told the Base Realignment and Closure Commission earlier this month as one of the reasons for recommending the closure of the local shipyard. "In order to have a Navy of the future, we need to redirect our resources in order to run more efficiently."
The Navy has justified its decision to reduce the number of submarines it operates on the assumption that they are primarily Cold War weapons of little or no value in today’s global war on terrorism.
"Do we need more attack submarines? More nuclear platforms? More stealth bombers? More armored divisions?," Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said in his May 16 testimony before the closure commission. "I think we need a more mobile, and better trained and equipped force, which is exactly what the DoD has been pushing for."
Evidence of this shift lies in the budget dictates of the Department of Defense. The cut to funding available for refueling the existing Los Angeles-688-class subs, which is the primary work being done at the Portsmouth yard, will lead to the decommissioning of these vessels. Additional cutbacks in the purchases of new subs means fewer subs in the fleet of the future.
There are many, both inside and out of the military however, who believe these assumptions about the usefulness of submarines in Rumsfeld’s new Navy are just plain wrong.
"I think they’re being shortsighted," said New Hampshire 1st District Congressman Jeb Bradley. "What happens if something happens between China and Taiwan? What are we going to send in there?"
The conservative Washington, D.C.-based think tank, the Heritage Foundation, agrees.
"A robust fleet of attack submarines is imperative in today’s world," wrote Jack Spencer, the foundation’s senior policy analyst for defense and national security, in a March 30 article. "In wars, especially in distant regions of the world where the United States has vital national interests, forward-deployed attack submarines can mount the first line of defense against advancing enemy forces or provide the initial salvo of a surprise offensive."
In fact, on March 21, 2003, within the first two days of Operation Iraqi Freedom, a Los Angeles-class nuclear submarine, the USS Pittsburgh, did just that, firing her missiles at Baghdad. The Pittsburgh is one of the many submarines involved in the latest war with Iraq to be refueled and repaired at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
And the Heritage Foundation chronicled many other conflicts in which submarines played important roles.
"During the first Gulf War, and again in 1997 and 1998, submarines launched cruise missiles at Iraqi targets," Spencer wrote. "(Submarines) launched cruise missiles at Bosnian targets in 1995 and fired 25 percent of the Tomahawk missiles that were used in the Kosovo conflict in 1999."
Subs were also used in limited-strike missions, such as those against suspected terrorist camps in Afghanistan in 1998 and suspected chemical weapons facilities in Sudan, the Heritage Foundation analyst said.
Perhaps the most important reason for maintaining a strong submarine fleet is the ability of these vessels to deploy quickly. This is a critical aspect of what Adm. Clark calls "the Fleet Response Plan (FRP)," which he instituted in 2003.
"The goal of FRP is to keep the Navy ready to surge adequate forces at a moment’s notice, without regard to fixed deployment times and intervals," (UnderseaWarfare - The Official Magazine of the U.S. Submarine Force noted in its fall 2004 edition.)
According to Vice Adm. Kirk H. Donald, commander, Naval Submarine Forces, it is a role the vessels under his command are uniquely suited to fill.
"The ongoing global war on terrorism has required rethinking how Naval forces, including submarines, prepare to deploy and are sustained during a protracted war," Donald told UnderseaWarfare. "The role of the submarine continues to expand. We provide a unique capability to surge when and where we are needed, arrive on station early, observe the enemy covertly as long as necessary, deploy special operations forces, unmanned underwater vehicles and unmanned sensors, and conduct strike operations with unmatched speed, responsiveness, accuracy and lethality."
All this capacity is being compromised by the Bush defense budget and the Pentagon, Spencer said.
"Despite warnings in recent years from U.S. Navy officials, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Science Board that the U.S. needs more submarines, the Pentagon’s budget could lead to fewer," the Heritage Foundation analyst said. "Three Los Angeles-class subs were scheduled to be refueled and overhauled in 2007. However, because the president’s 2006 budget cuts funding for two of these overhauls, those subs will be lost."
And Spencer believes that in the final analysis, it will be cheaper to overhaul the Los Angeles-class vessels than to purchase newer-model submarines.
"The new Virginia-class subs cost over $2 billion each," he said. "By refueling older, but still very capable Los Angeles-class subs, the Navy can get over a decade of use for only $200 million per submarine."
Spencer joins the growing chorus of those who believe the Navy is misguided in its decision to limit the number of submarines in the nation’s arsenal.
"Although other Naval platforms can perform some of the (submarine service’s) functions, none can perform them all," the Heritage Foundation analyst said. "More important, none can perform them undetected."
That is why the foundation is asking Congress to restore funding to refuel two Los Angeles-class submarines in 2007.
-
-
ADMIRAL KUROYEDOV PLANS IMPROVEMENTS TO RUSSIAN NAVY
By Roger McDermott
Friday, June 10, 2005
Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy, has promised improvements to the Navy in response to the challenge of meeting emerging and future threats to the Russian state or its interests. These reforms, long overdue and vital if the collapse of the Navy is to be avoided, envisage the creation of strike forces in conjunction with other service branches. It also underscores Kuroyedov's confidence that he will retain his post, despite the catalogue of Naval disasters that has plagued his tenure in recent years, and despite the apparent conviction that real reform can be achieved in the Russian Navy without massive overhauls or more systemic reform.
In essence, Kuroyedov is attempting to implement lessons learned by the Russian military from the experience of Western militaries in their campaigns in the Gulf War, Yugoslavia, and Iraq, witnessing the harnessing of such "strike group." This would involve in practical terms the inclusion of submarine, aircraft, and coastal troop elements. Eliminating unnecessary duplication of commands and enhancing the efficiency of the command-and-control structure is his aim, justified on the basis of reluctantly admitting that the Soviet methods must be abandoned: "There are fewer ships and men now, and the control-and-command system has become hardly manageable and too cumbersome, and we should therefore go over to a two-tier or three-tier control-and-command system," Kuroyedov confessed (Interfax, June 4). A test case for the realization of such reform plans will be the planned abolition of the command-and-control body of the 7th operational squadron of the Northern Fleet, in order to streamline the command system and eliminate needless duplication of orders.
Kuroyedov has a proven track record for identifying the high stakes involved in balancing his own survival and claiming to promote a rather grand vision of the Russian Navy, which flies in the face of its well-publicized structural and material problems. That his reform plans begin with the Northern Fleet is not unexpected, since its problems are widely known. On June 7 20 Western defense attaches, including representatives from the United States, Britain, Germany, and Italy, participated in a familiarization visit to the Northern Fleet at Murmansk (Itar-Tass, June 7). Their purpose was to learn the routines, recreation, and combat training of the Northern Fleet's personnel and how it is organized. Western countries will await with interest the outcome of Kuroyedov's reform plans.
Underlying these displays of the continued "strength" of the Russian Navy, there are real concerns about whether Western countries will financially assist Russia in the more expensive aspects of managing the crisis in its Navy. Sergei Antipov, deputy director of Russia's Federal Atomic Energy Agency, has urged the G8 to increase its support for the allocation of aid to dismantle nuclear submarines decommissioned by the Navy (Itar-Tass, June 6). He said that 80 submarines decommissioned to date cost $4 billion, though donors had only pledged to allocate around $2.5 billion, with the bulk of the money earmarked for disassembling submarines in western Russia. "Our goal here is to draw the attention of all the signatory nations of Global Partnership to the fact that the problem of decommissioned submarines is no less acute in Russia's Far East than in western regions, while financing for the Far East is far scantier," Antipov asserted. Japan is the only G8 donor currently allocating money for disposal of submarines in the Far East. The Japanese government has promised to allocate $100 million, though only providing $6 million, enough to scrap just one submarine.
Promoting the plight of the Russian Far East was certainly an important priority during the historic visit of Vice-Admiral Enichi Nakashima, commander of Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force to the Pacific Fleet in Vladivostok, ostensibly to develop closer bilateral Naval relations. Accompanied by Admiral Viktor Fedorov, Pacific Fleet Commander, and Vladimir Nikolayev, mayor of Vladivostok, Nakashima inspected the Varshavyanka diesel submarine, a marine unit, and the Varyag missile cruiser. The visit will end on June 10 with a high-profile joint rescue exercise involving Russian warships, including the Admiral Vinogradov, as well as a missile boat, airplane, and a helicopter, far from Kuroyedov vision of strike-force groups. While the visit itself has triggered speculation concerning the purpose behind the development of bilateral Naval links between Russia and Japan, there can be little doubt that such closer relations are linked to Antipov's concerns that contacts should be concluded with Japan to assist in the disposal of at least five more submarines (Itar-Tass, June 6; Interfax, June 7).
The main drawback to Kuroyedov's "vision" for the reform of the Russian Navy, is that Russia still avoids considering exactly what sort of Navy it requires for the 21st century, while remaining vague about the precise nature of the threats envisaged that may demand the formation of appropriate strike forces. What is becoming obvious to Russian commanders is the need to improve the command-and-control system in the Navy and to replace existing Soviet models and thinking, which have become dated and no longer relevant to Russia's security needs. Disposing of dangerous nuclear vessels will require greater Western aid; something Russia will continue to press at all levels.
-
Blunt arrows: the limited utility of ASATs
by Dwayne Day
Excerpt from The Space Review
Monday, June 6, 2005
Last week in The Space Review Mark Listner wrote about the Outer Space Treaty and anti-satellite weapons (ASATs): “Although technically the treaty does not allow these types of weapons (considering the ban on military activities), the fact is that these have been under development at times in the past, and may be so today.” (See “It’s time to rethink international space law”, May 31, 2005)
This is false. The Outer Space Treaty places no limits on anti-satellite weapons and never has. During the Cold War neither superpower actively sought an international treaty that would restrict their development of anti-satellite weapons. There were several reasons for this, but a primary one was the difficulty in verifying such a treaty, especially considering the nature of the Soviet ASAT system, which utilized rockets that were indistinguishable from active ICBMs unless they were physically inspected.
Many of the conditions that make ASAT weapons not very attractive remain in effect, and some of the conditions that led to their approval in the past do not exist today.
Despite the lack of ASAT arms control, the United States has not demonstrated much enthusiasm or interest in developing an ASAT weapon since the beginning of the space age. This was because ASAT weapons were expensive, limited in military utility, and provocative. In fact, it appears that the decisive factor in developing or not developing an American ASAT has often been the existence of an enemy ASAT capability. Given the high cost and limited utility of the weapon, multiple justifications were needed to make it possible, and the one that tipped the balance in favor of development was the existence of an enemy that needed to be deterred.
The international situation has changed significantly since the Cold War. However, many of the conditions that make ASAT weapons not very attractive remain in effect, and some of the conditions that led to their approval in the past do not exist today.
Banning WMDs, not ASATs
The Outer Space Treaty resulted from a long series of discussions within the United States government and eventually between the two superpowers. The most important section of the Outer Space Treaty is Article IV, which states:
“States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.
The Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military maneuvers on celestial bodies shall be forbidden. The use of military personnel for scientific research or for any other peaceful purposes shall not be prohibited. The use of any equipment or facility necessary for peaceful exploration of the Moon and other celestial bodies shall also not be prohibited.”
Like most Cold War era treaties, this one essentially codified actions that the superpowers did not find attractive to pursue in the first place. Putting weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear bombs in orbit makes little sense. Orbital mechanics means that an orbiting weapon spends most of its time out of range of its target, unlike an ICBM that is always the same distance from its target. In addition, limited computing power also restricted the utility of an orbiting bomb, because it could not be programmed with a large target list. Finally, command and control of a weapon overhead was worrisome—what if the other side was able to jam or take over the weapon? Neither side therefore wanted to place weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in orbit, making a treaty banning them possible.
Similarly, there is no logical reason to base weapons on other planets unless they are defending other installations there. If both superpowers had active moonbases they might take weapons to defend them. But neither had plans for moonbases and so it was an easy step to ban all weapons—not simply WMDs—from the moon, Mars, and other terrestrial bodies.
A State Department website explains the origins and significance of the Outer Space Treaty, noting that its two most important provisions are the ban on WMDs and the ban on weapons on other terrestrial bodies. Nowhere does it mention a ban on ASATs. The Outer Space Treaty mentions nothing about ASATs, and for good reason—both the United States and the Soviet Union already possessed them when they signed the treaty.
The Outer Space Treaty mentions nothing about ASATs, and for good reason—both the United States and the Soviet Union already possessed them when they signed the treaty.
The United States had Program 437, a system that utilized a Thor ballistic missile equipped with a 1.4 megaton nuclear warhead. It would launch from Johnston Island in the Pacific Ocean and fly essentially a ballistic trajectory. Program 437 operated from 1964 until the early 1970s, at which time the inefficiency, expense, and limited usefulness of the weapon led to its withdrawal from service. Notably the Program 437 ASATs were both ground-based and used a nuclear weapon (a weapon of mass destruction), but did not enter orbit. These facts did not prevent the United States from signing the Outer Space Treaty, nor did any other signatories charge that the Americans were in violation of a treaty that they were signing.
The Soviets possessed their own ASAT weapon. Known as the “satellite destroyer” (or “Istrebitel Sputnikov” in Russian), it was fitted atop a modified ballistic missile and used the co-orbital technique, meaning that it entered the same orbit as its target and essentially got close enough to it to fire a weapon, sort of like a Claymore directional mine or a shotgun blast. Work on the IS started in the early 1960s and it was tested through the early-1970s. The existence of the satellite destroyer also did not prevent the signing of the Outer Space Treaty.
The existence of both of these weapons did vastly complicate any effort to ban ASAT weapons, however. In order to verify such a ban, each side would have to inspect the payloads of the other side. During the early 1960s the United States held substantial internal discussions about this subject, particularly the concern that the Soviets would want to inspect American rockets carrying reconnaissance satellites. This was discussed in the NSAM 156 Committee, named after the National Security Action Memorandum that established it.
Over time, those concerned with ASAT arms control both inside the executive branch and in Congress determined that on-site verification was impossible, and so any ban would have to focus on testing which should be detectable under many circumstances. But the fact that the Soviet weapon had already been tested and was considered to be operational tended to complicate and nullify this debate.
For the full article, visit The Space Review
-
Chinese Submariners Are Different
StrategyPage Opinion
June 9, 2005: Chinese submariners are different. In the United States, submarines have crews that stay with the boat, just like on any other warship. The only exception is the SSBNs (ballistic missile subs), which have two crews, so that the boat can spend the maximum amount of time at sea. The Chinese do it differently. Each class of subs has crews trained for different types of missions, and these crews are assigned to a sub in order to train in their specialty (mine warfare, anti-surface warfare, and anti-submarine warfare). Another reason for the multiple crews (usually two per sub) is also to increase the number of trained crews ahead of the introduction of many more new subs in the next decade. The Chinese have recognized, and accepted the fact, that it takes over a decade to train effective submariners, particularly the Chief Petty Officers (the “Chiefs”) who really make a boat work. The chiefs were given a big pay raise five years ago, and made to understand that being a naval NCO was a good, and lucrative, career choice.
The only flaw in this plan is the poor condition and reliability of Chinese submarines. Chinese boats are either bad copies of Russian designs, or even worse attempts to build Chinese designs. But the Chinese know that just having submarine crews is not enough, you have to get these guys to sea, as much as possible. Under the old Soviet system, the sub crews spent most of their time living in barracks, and getting lectured in classrooms, or doing dry runs while their sub was dockside, motionless. When Soviet subs did go to sea, it was for a day, and then back to port and the barracks. By the end of the Cold War, the Russians and the Chinese were convinced that the Western approach (keep the boats at sea as much as possible) was ancient wisdom that still applied, and worked.
The Chinese submariners have to work for their higher pay. Keeping their creaky boats at sea means a lot more maintenance and repair work in port, and a lot more alertness and tension at sea. There are more accidents as these boats are pushed beyond what they were designed for. The Soviet design theory held that you built subs that spent most of their time in port, and then went to war and maybe survived a few weeks or months, and maybe got a shot in. This didn’t work for the Soviets during World War II, but they stuck with the concept during most of the Cold War. Now China is trying to design and build a new generation of subs on the Western model (spend lots of time at sea in peace time, and be good enough to kick ass and survive in wartime.)
-
Eight retired submarines to be transported to Severodvinsk this summer
Four civil crews from Severodvinsk are preparing the submarines for transportation at the navy base in Vidyaevo.
2005-06-08 19:00
Total eight nuclear submarines of 671RTM (Victor-III) project will be tugged from the Northern fleet bases to the Zvezdochka shipyard for scrapping in July and August, Interfax reported. Three subs located in the Ura Bay, two – in Zapadnaya Litsa, and three – in Vidyaevo.
The dismantling works will be sponsored by Canada, which promised to allocate $18m for this purpose. This Canadian initiative is the part of the one billion Canadian dollars obligation in the frames of the Global Partnership program adopted in 2002 at the G8 summit. The dismantling of the first multipurpose submarine sponsored by Canada, has been already completed. Scrapping of another two submarines is under way. Canada pledged to allocate $100m to finance dismantling of 12 multipurpose submarines at the Zvezdochka shipyard.
At the moment about 50 nuclear laid-up submarines are scattered around at the Northern fleet bases waiting for dismantling, most of them belong to the first and second generation nuclear submarines.
-
New destroyers too expensive
June 8, 2005 - 1:34PM
Australia is running the risk of buying expensive navy destroyers it doesn't need, forcing cuts to other key defence programs, a top defence analyst warns.
Former defence official Hugh White said the most likely tradeoff for commissioning the $6 billion air warfare destroyers (AWDs) would be cuts to an RAAF plan to buy 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters (JSFs).
Such a cut would have serious strategic costs, he said.
Mr White said the navy maintained it needed the AWDs to defend amphibious landing forces against air attack.
However, there were few credible scenarios where such defence would be required.
In an analysis released by the Lowy Institute for International Policy, Mr White said it made no sense to invest $6 billion in AWDs to support maritime operations if it meant cuts to frontline combat air power or to the land forces they were intended to protect.
"There is no compelling strategic reason to buy AWDs and even less to build them in Australia," he said.
Under the AWD plan, the navy will acquire three advanced warships, able to defend against aircraft, cruise missile and even ballistic missile attack, at a cost of $6 billion.
The government has already specified that the ships will be fitted with the Aegis combat system and built in Australia by the Australian Submarine Corporation. It's yet to decide on the actual ship design.
Mr White said there was really only one credible scenario when AWDs would be essential and that was if Australia needed to dislodge bases established by a hostile major power from somewhere like PNG.
He said in most scenarios that protection could be just as well provided by the RAAF while in coalition operations that would be done by US forces.
Mr White said the AWDs should not be acquired to the detriment of RAAF or army programs.
"As things stand, buying AWDs might mean we need to cut the JSF program to as few as 60 aircraft. Apparently this possibility is now being seriously considered within defence," he said.
Mr White also warned that the purchasing strategy, in which the navy is seeking a ship designed exclusively to meet Australian requirements, imposed high risks of cost blowouts, delays and capability shortfalls.
"The AWDs would be by far the most complex naval project undertaken by Australia since the Collins Class submarine project and they carry many of the same kind of risk that caused such problems in the Collins," he said.
Mr White said there was no rush as the navy's four FFG guided missile frigates were now being upgraded and would remain in service long after the planned AWD proposed entry to service in 2013.
"There is plenty of time to consider this important and risky project more carefully," he said.
-
How do we model this in Harpoon?!
Oz's Magnetic Sub-Hunter
Being a sub-hunter has gotten tough, lately. The new diesel subs that Iran and China are buying up are tiny, quiet, and can swim through the crannies that hug the coasts. That makes 'em really hard to find. And it's a major reason why the U.S. Navy is switching from passive sonars to Slayer-loud, active sonars that makes whales slam dance onto dry land.
Australian scientists may have found a better way to find these quiet subs, The Engineer reports -- one that doesn't drive whales psycho.
The Australian development, called MAGSAFE, uses the detection of changing magnetic fields to identify and monitor a moving submarine. The method, which is unique in that it captures 12 magnetic field-related data values per reading as opposed to the single number measured by a conventional magnetic anomaly detector (MAD) magnetometer, arises from research into new minerals exploration technologies that detect magnetic fields...
The technology is basically a 'tensor gradiometer', which is a device that can measure minute changes in magnetic field gradients. It uses three independent rotating sensors, which use high-temperature superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs) to monitor the magnetic field gradient.
In theory, the system means that pilots whose aircraft are fitted with MAGSAFE detectors will be able to measure the range, depth and bearing of a submarine, how fast it is going and if it is diving - all from one flyby.
-
Many Replacements for the Periscope
June 5, 2005: The U.S. is experimenting with two new low-cost optics systems that would allow submerged submarines to "look" around at sea level without having to get close to the surface and deploy a traditional periscope. This also includes an upgrade for existing periscopes by adding a high-tech camera system.
The Virtual Periscope will be tested aboard the USS Chicago this summer. It takes advantage of the fact that the surface of the ocean acts as a simple lens, collecting light from above the service and refracting it below. A small camera mounted on the sail of the submarine will collect the light and use high-speed signal processing software -- similar enhancement techniques used by NASA and government agencies for cleaning up blurred images -- to assemble a picture of what is on the surface. The images won't be good enough to identify what kind of ship type is above them, but it would be able to warn a submarine that there is something in the way on the surface. Virtual Periscope is good to about 100 to 200 feet below the surface before the light fades out and can spot a 30 meter tall object at about a distance of 1600 meters. U.S. Special Operations Command plans to put a smaller version of Virtual Periscope on its swimmer delivery vehicles.
For cleaner pictures, the Low-Cost Expendable Sensor (LCES) using a small tethered camera on a buoy to bob to the surface to send images back. LCES can be deployed from the 76mm signal ejector and will ride above 3 inches above the surface to take pictures. Signal processing is used to assemble the images into a stable 360 degree view of what is above the ship. When finished, the line is cut and the sub can sail away. To an observer, the device looks like a piece of trash bobbing up and down on the surface, not a periscope.
Each system has its drawbacks. LCES requires use of the signal ejector on the sub, so there is some noise emitted in deploying it. Virtual Periscope has no emissions, but the algorithms necessary to clean up the images are complex and need to be refined in order to make the system tactically useful.
Both systems are the latest evolution away from the traditional fixed-mount periscope of conventional lenses and prisms. Virginia-class subs use electronics imaging equipment mounted on deployable masts that telescope upward out of the sail, with images transmitted down into the control room using fiber optics. Once transmitted, the images can be put up on large displays anywhere in the control room for anyone to examine. The Navy is also going to upgrade existing periscopes on older submarines to an integrated imaging system, mounting a digital camera at the top of the periscope and sending images via fiber-optic cable to a monitor in the control room. Moving the camera to the top of the mast gets rid of a lot of moving optical parts, increasing reliability.
The Navy is looking into another upgrade to put an array of cameras onto the mast to provide a 360-degree view, again using some image processing to assemble the final result. Such a system would allow the Navy to free up precious space in the submarine that now goes to the pipes and hydraulics of the periscope handling system. Once in place, the camera and imaging hardware for the new system would also support both Virtual Periscope and LCES, so both features could essentially be added through software upgrades. – Doug Mohney
-
AAR: Torpedo Run [spoiler Alert]
By Paul Bridge
After receiving our latest orders, I asked the Jimmy (First Lieutenant) to plot an estimated path from the last reported position to Jakarta. I planned to position the Oberon astride their Path of Intended Movement [PIM] at this point. If we were unable to intercept them from the front, I was dubious if we would be successful in a stern chase.
As we made transit southward, we periodically rose to periscope depth to 'sniff' the air for electronic transmissions with our Electronic Support Measures [ESM]. Two small patrol boats were discovered a fair distance away, but were not a threat to us. A pair of Gannet Maritime Patrol Aircraft [MPA] were also found during one of our Jack-in-the-box manoeuvres. These units were the most fearsome as they could strike without warning.
A supply vessel was found heading in the direction of Jakarta. I decided to investigate. We ran a Target Motion Analysis [TMA] and calculated a firing solution. While the fire-control team was 'polishing the cannonball' by refining their solution, Oberon moved closer to shorten the run on her torpedoes. Just as I was about to fire, the target was found to be Neutral! An international incident was barely averted.
Not long after, multiple ESM contacts were reported to the southeast. This had to be the convoy we had been seeking. We increased power to cruise speed and I was happy to see that we would be closing the targets off of their starboard bow. As the target courses and ranges firmed up, firing solutions were calculated and fed into the torpedoes. I saw that there would only be a single escort vessel between us and the freighters so I elected to 'shoot' our way into the convoy. Two Bidder Mk20S torpedoes were allocated to the escort and one Mk20S each at 2 freighters. The first salvo was launched at a range of 5nm. They were not detected until they were nearly at the end of their torpedo runs. All three targets were killed outright.
A nice side effect had the remaining merchants running in the opposite direction. This allowed Oberon to move in even closer so that she now sat directly on their PIM and would not need to either expend energy or make noise for her second attack. Shorter-ranged Mk8 torpedoes were chosen for the second volley as the merchant vessels nearly overran the Oberon. Longer-ranged Bidders were saved for any interfering escorts. The surviving transports were destroyed so my option to attack escorts was exercised. Two more escorts were put on the bottom with a pair of torpedoes each. Soon afterward, victory was awarded.
A nice little scenario for submarine enthusiasts. The Gannets did not play a major role in my game, but just the knowledge that they were present was enough to make my skin crawl as I expected my first indication of their presence to be either a depth charge or torpedo attack. Thanks for putting it together.
-
AAR: Cuban Missile Crisis [Cuba]
By Freek Schepers
Presidente Castro was in fine form, tonight. His six hour oration was just ending with, "Y los imperialistas no pondrán un pie en Cuba". << And the Imperialists shall never set foot on Cuba >> Those words were still ringing in my ears as I read my latest orders. My mission was clearly to protect our Soviet "guests" from the Yankee pirates.
I ordered Combat Air Patrols [CAPs] to be stationed over all airbases. Four patrol boats were off-shore from Guantanamo Bay. The fact that the Imperialists took every opportunity to trail their coats in front of us was too much for me to endure. My machismo would not allow me to sit quietly while it happened so I ordered the four patrol boats to make a pass across the bay to show the Yankees that we were not afraid of them.
As my CAPs climbed to patrol altitude, they found that the Gringos were not co-operating. They maintained their provocative air patrols over international waters so I ordered my CAPs to close and engage them. Who would be able to prove that the fight had not started over Cuban waters? I sent a pair of Farmers and another pair of Frescoes to scratch a couple of annoying fleas off of base Sagua La Grande's back. My Alkali SARH AAMs proved much more effective than the American Sidewinders. A Sabre and a Starfighter were killed outright. First blood to Aerea Fuerza Cubano!
A swarm of unidentified air contacts were reported over international waters and my men salivated at the thought of combat with the Americans, but I restrained them and only released them to engage those contacts in or near Cuban air space. I knew that Key West AB had long-ranged Nike-Hercules SAMs and did not want to give the enemy a chance to test them on us.
By a stroke of luck, a U-2 flew right into one of my MiG-21 CAPs over Libertad and was shot down. I needed to kill one more for my ViConds. My luck held as the same fighting pair managed to close upon a Skyraider EW platform that was wreaking havoc on my Ground Controlled Interception [GCI] radar. They loosed their Atoll missiles and were rewarded by watching it explode in mid-air. Score 4:0 for the home team.
Another pair of Fresco had been sent north to hunt a pair of Bogeys. However, imagine their surprise when they turned on their Fire-Control Radar [FCR] only to find that they were in the midst of five enemy aircraft! However, true to their fighter pilot aggressiveness, they turned into the attack instead of running. They exchanged missiles with a Sabre without either side getting hit and turned back to engage with aerial gunnery. The fighters were escorting a Voodoo recon plane. Hopefully, they would be able to kill the Sabres for the main course and still be able to enjoy their dessert, the Voodoo. They evaded the AAMs and then slid into the Six-O'Clock position behind the enemy. The Sabre died without ever knowing what killed her followed by the unarmed Voodoo. Score was now 6-love.
My missile and gunboats found the DD Charles Badger in Gitmo Bay and unleashed their four Styx SSMs and decided that they had done their duty for the revolution and retired westward. Unfortunately, no explosions were seen or heard. I kept my CAPs close to their home bases and successfully killed all enemy fighters that encroached with very light losses for the moment. I was beginning to worry that the enemy would not try to engage me under my own radar coverage and that I might have to venture into the Florida Strait to meet my ViCond of 50 aircraft kills. I wished that he would come south to do battle. The Chinese have sage advice regarding situations like this: "Be careful for what you wish." It was indeed prophetic.
As my pilots were rejoicing their victories and their planes were being re-armed and re-fueled, the air raid sirens wailed long and hard. I had very little left with which to oppose these new strikers. Libertad AB managed to scramble sufficient interceptors to kill most of her assailants and thus survived with minimal damage to the base. However, as most of Sagua's and Holguin's defenders were out of action on the tarmac, these bases were hammered mercilessly. Sagua was almost totally flattened with only a handful of planes surviving the onslaught from Sabres based in Florida. It seems as though wave attacks were not limited to the PRC as wave after wave of attackers crashed upon Cuban shores. Holguin was similarly pulverized by Skyhawks that could only have come from as yet undetected CVBGs offshore. These three-pronged attacks were exceptionally well-timed.
I had failed to protect my Soviet guests. During the attack, some strikers attacked the Soviet IRBM sites. Evidently, the Soviet commander elected to launch his missiles rather than risk losing them. Everyone watched helplessly as the ballistic missiles rose on pillars of flame towards ConUS. This war had now crossed the nuclear threshold as IRBM strikes wiped out MacDill AFB, Norfolk, and Jacksonville. However, I still had my orders so I continued to protect the Motherland as best I could.
My bases at San Julien and Libertad were relatively unscathed so I transferred some of their defenders to Sagua and Holguin in an attempt to provide them some protection. As they were about to land, more attacks were detected from US naval aviation. They had fortuitously arrived just in time to engage and defeat this latest round of attacks. However, my eastern bases were still unprotected so I transferred yet more assets. Again, I was "rewarded" by their timely arrival to have them face more inbound strikers from the carrier battle groups. This time, they turned out to be nuclear-capable Vigilantes! I could only assume that the Gringo commander had decided to retaliate-in-kind after learning of the Soviet attack on his country.
I could not afford to allow a single attacker to release its payload. One nuclear device could render Cuba uninhabitable. As my pilots intercepted each Vigilante, I kept my fingers crossed. There would be no second chance. Luck smiled upon me this day as I was able to destroy the entire wave of nuclear-armed bombers. Within hours, I was granted "victory" even as the firestorms continued to sweep through the Continental US [ConUS].
Another exceptional scenario. Thanks for sharing it. Thanks, also, to JM Serrano for his linguistic assistance in writing this AAR.
-
Boeing Eyes High-Flying Torpedo
By RICHARD R. BURGESS, Managing Editor
Boeing Integrated Defense Systems is proposing a new weapon that would enable sub-hunting aircraft to fire at targets from high altitudes, reducing the time between target acquisition and attack.
Steven L. Wingfield, manager of JDAM Business Development for the Boeing unit, said the proposed antisubmarine warfare (ASW) weapon for the High-Altitude ASW Weapon Concept (HAAWC), would be launched from the P-8A Multimission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) at an altitude of 30,000 feet and glide seven to 10 minutes to the water entry point, where it would shed its wings and activate a parachute to lower the torpedo into the water to begin its run toward the target.
Currently, ASW aircraft such as the P-3 have to make a time-consuming descent from their surveillance altitudes of 30,000 feet to a release altitude of 300-1,000 feet and release a torpedo, Wingfield said. “That descent down to the release point and then the climb back up to surveillance altitude uses a lot of [fuel], reducing orbit and surveillance time. While you are climbing, (it) reduces your ability to surveill, as well.”
The HAAWC would enable the P-8 to launch the weapon from a high altitude based on targeting information generated by its own sensors or the sensors of other platforms. This would save time in deploying a weapon, and obviate the need for the aircraft or other ASW platforms to enter threat zones.
“I don’t know what the descent rate of MMA will be,” said Steve Morrow, Boeing’s manager for advanced development of naval weapons, “but it’s intuitive that we can probably get a torpedo down from altitude faster than you can get the airplane down.” That would be an advantage in “a fast-reaction attack based on a pop-up radar contact of a periscope,” he said.
Wingfield said the HAAWC proposal is a derivative of the new Mk 54 antisubmarine torpedo that entered service in 2004. The Mk 54 is an all-digital lightweight torpedo that marries technology from the older Mk 46 and Mk 50 air- and surface-launched torpedoes with advanced software algorithms from the large submarine-launched Mk 48 torpedo.
Stephen G. Sherrick, manager of business development for Boeing Integrated Defense Systems, said that last fall “one of the Mk 54 torpedo guys asked us, ‘Hey, can you put a wing on that thing and guide it for us?’”
The HAAWC comprises parts from other munitions. An Mk 54 would be fitted with the wings designed for a Standoff Land-Attack Missile-Expanded Response cruise missile to enable it to glide to the target area. The tail assembly would include the guidance kit designed for the Joint Direct-Attack Munition, which contains a Global Positioning System receiver for precision guidance.
The HAAWC also could be equipped with a data link to transmit target position updates while the weapon is in flight, further improving the weapon’s accuracy, Wingfield said.
The HAAWC concept, with its standoff capability, may offer tactical collateral advantages to offset some of those submarines have in the cat-and-mouse game of ASW. When running silent underwater, a submarine’s sensitive hull-mounted or towed-array hydrophones can detect a helicopter or patrol plane as it flies overhead. In addition, an attack on hostile submarines operating in the vicinity of enemy air-defense ships or shore-based air-defense networks currently would put the attacking aircraft at risk.
Boeing “has provided NAVSEA (Naval Sea Systems Command) and the Naval Air Systems Command with a technical feasibility assessment and a [rough] cost assessment to conduct a high-altitude ASW weapon concept demonstration,” Morrow said. The information was provided at the request of those commands, he said.
Spokespeople for the two systems commands and the Naval Undersea Warfare Center declined comment on the HAAWC because it is not a program of record.
-
More Royal Navy frigates for Chile
The strong international price of copper for the second year running has bolstered Chile’s coffers and a percentage of that additional income is earmarked for military equipment purchases including several Royal Navy frigates, German Leopard tanks and refurbished F-16 fighters.
Excess income from copper sales abroad represented last year an additional two billion US dollars for the Chilean government and for the military who are legally entitled to a percentage, almost 700 million US dollars in these last two years, although part of it has already been spent in cancelling debts.
President Ricardo Lagos and the commanders of the three services agreed this week that those funds will be used in the coming nine years (until 2014) to keep advancing with the modernization process of the Chilean Armed Forces.
The shopping list includes 20 to 28 refurbished F-16 fighter bombers belonging to the Dutch Air Force (with a twenty year horizon), which would replace the current Mirage fleet and act as support for the brand new ten F-16 already purchased directly from United States. Total cost is in the range of 150 million US dollars.
The Chilean Navy already has defined the purchase of three missile Type 23 frigates from the Royal Navy, an operation involving 250 million US dollars, according to Navy commander Admiral Mighe Vergara who would like to see the contract signed before June 18 when he retires.
Traditionally Britain has been the main supplier for the Chilean Navy.
Finally the Army is planning to incorporate a first batch of 100 Leopard II German made tanks selling at an average cost of 400,000 US dollars each in the European market. The Chilean Army currently has 280 Leopard I tanks.
However no final decision has yet been reached since the Dutch government has offered a full package which includes jet fighters, frigates and tanks.
-
AAR: Cuban Missile Crisis
By Freek Schepers
After reading and re-reading my orders and the accompanying Rules of Engagement [ROE] from SACLant, I immediately double-checked to make certain that all of my units had their weapons Weapons on Safe status and were locked down. I certainly didn't want to be the initiator of nuclear shooting war!
I realized that many of my vessels were a long distance from the line that the President had designated as the limit of the quarantine zone. Therefore, I ordered all vessels in Guantanamo Bay to sortie. As well, much of NavSurfLant was currently positioned near Florida and Cuba. I elected to gamble and meet the freighters in a show of force at the boundaries of the Exclusion zone. My orders were quite clear. Under no circumstances was I to allow them entry into the Quarantine Zone. All vessels were ordered to full speed and a Combat Air Patrol [CAP] was launched from Guantanamo Bay. If this turned out to be a shooting war, she could expect to be attacked within minutes of it starting. I was very concerned about TF Iwo Jima. She was deep in the Caribbean, far from support, and pretty much limited by the search range of her helos.
Sabre fighters were launched to escort my Voodoo recon planes from MacDill. Additional Sabres and Starfighters were also ordered aloft as Barrier CAPs [barCAPs] from Key West and Homestead AFBs. Very specific orders were given to the flight leaders that they were to remain over international waters and not to fire unless fired upon. The disciplined men of Naval Aviation did not bat an eyelash in the face of these orders and I knew that they would follow them to the letter.
With fighters leading the way and, hopefully, clearing a path in front of any potential opposition, I launched my precious U-2 spy plane. Contrary to normal doctrine, I would try to make the ingress at low level and only climb to take photos when closer to the objective. I hoped that the high-flying fighter escorts and Voodoo reconnaissance planes would distract the enemy sufficiently so that the U-2 would be unmolested in her mission. I would also try to send her around the known air defences and through the back door.
Starfighters from Key West were the first to meet aircraft rising from the Ciudad de Libertad airbase. They were approached on an intercept profile, but my orders forbade early engagement. They would have to prove themselves hostile before I was allowed to take action. The fighters turned out be Fishbeds and my planes were soon to be on the receiving end of Atoll missiles! While one flight evaded, the second flight launched six Sidewinders with no effect. The pilots went to Afterburner and activated their internal cannon. In violent Air-Combat Manoeuvres [ACM], both Fishbeds were shredded by the M61 cannon fire. A Beagle patrol plane was detected. The fighters must have been the assigned escort for this asset. As one flight approached her, the radar warning receiver went wild. A Goa SAM had been fired! Again, the men undertook wild evasive manoeuvres. This was going to be the common theme throughout the day. The men were lucky this time as the SAMs ran out of fuel.
The Beagle appeared to be unprotected so one flight of 3 Starfighters approached her and set themselves up in her 'Six-O'clock' position. However, to their surprise, her gunners opened fire and killed two of the F-104s! The surviving fighter immediately returned fire and killed the Cuban, but it was small consolation for the loss of his two squadron mates.
Two more Fishbeds rose to challenge the F-104s and managed to kill two of them with only the single loss of a Fishbed before all belligerents were forced to break off combat and return to base. Thus far, Cuba was leading in the scoring race, 4:3. The Sabre pilots from Homestead AFB heard the sad report over their guard frequencies and vowed revenge. Now, if only the Cuban pilots would co-operate. They met CAPs launched from Sagua La Grande AB but were not fired upon. The enemy was not co-operating and this frustrated them. Finally, after a series of feints, one Cuban loosed his Atoll missiles. They were evaded and he was closed and killed by guns after a swirling dance of death.
Two more Fishbeds met my relief CAP from Key West. This time, both MiGs were downed for the loss of a Crusader. The score was now tied but the men wanted a win, not a tie.
The Great Game moved back to Sagua La Grande. More Goa SAMs rose in opposition only to fall back into the sea when out of fuel. The MiGs fared better with both sides exchanging planes and lives. The score would remain tied.
As hoped, the fighter pilots were distracting the air defences and allowing the U-2 pilot to make his run on Libertad unopposed. The cost was high in both men and planes. In the midst of the battle, my Skyraider Electronic Warfare [EW] bird suddenly blinked off of the screen! Curse all radar operators. A marauding Fresco fighter had evidently crept within range of her without anyone noticing and shot her down. Now all of my aircraft would be naked against the Cuban radar.
Once Libertad was photographed, the U-2 dove back into the weeds and headed for St. Julien Air Base [AB] on the western tip of the island. She was in good company with her escorts. After another swirling battle with Frescoes and more SAMs, the U-2 was able to photograph the IRBM sites and leave. The price was 4 more fighters. The air force was learning a very hard lesson; aerial gunnery was not obsolescent even in the age of AAMs.
In their turn, Sagua La Grande AB and Holguin AB were reconnoitred and photographed using the same swarming technique. Multiple flights of fighters would distract the defenders so that the U-2 was unmolested. The price of admission was paid by the fighters. After these orders were fulfilled, I chose to adopt a more defensive stance. Instead of aggressive Target CAPs [TarCAP], I re-assigned my fighters to Barrier CAPs [barCAP] midway between Cuban bases and Florida. Only one further 'Incident' was encountered. A Beagle raid was detected by Gitmo originating from Holguin AB. I managed to scramble sufficient Phantom interceptors to crush the raiders, but elected not to retaliate against the base. The Russian and Cuban installations were so intermingled that I was worried about accidentally attacking a Russian installation and provoking a nuclear response. Today, discretion would definitely be the better part of valour.
On the high seas, I found myself in a quandry. The Quarantine zone was a large area and it was flooded with unknown contacts. I launched my Neptune Maritime Patrol Aircraft [MPA] to find and classify every ship. Unfortunately, radar can only tell me that a contact exists. It cannot tell you the nationality of the vessel. Thus, I had to overfly and positively identify each and every vessel; a long and arduous process.
As each of my groups raced to the edge of the Exclusion zone, the ASW co-ordinator aboard CVAN Enterprise reported, "Probable submarine contact in the Torpedo Danger Zone!" Somehow, a suspected submarine had managed to evade my escorts and ensconced herself between the CVAN and my destroyers! The battle group commander immediately ordered all ships to scatter at flank speed and launched 4 helos to prosecute this contact. It was not a minute too soon, either, as torpedo contacts were soon reported. The quick response prevented any damage. The confirmed hostility of the unknown submarine quickly ensured her destruction at the hands of the helo pilots.
As my MPA chased down vessels of all nationalities, they were able to positively identify six merchants flying the Hammer and Sickle. However, intelligence had reported seven such vessels leaving Soviet ports. A Golf-class SSG was even spotted running on the surface within the quarantine zone. I decided to give her a wide berth as her direction of travel was outward-bound.
Six merchants were intercepted before they could cross into the Quarantine zone and they were 'escorted' away from the area. I finally managed to find the elusive seventh merchant, but the Essex PhibRon was simply too far away to intercept her before she reached the barrier. Luckily, she did not cross the barrier as all merchants had apparently received orders to return. The world would not be destroyed in a nuclear nightmare this day, but I lost the game because I did not intercept her before she reached the zone.
This is a really neat scenario. Freek has done a good job simulating the ROE present during those 13 Days in October. Combat is possible and permitted, but the player must take extreme care in what and who he engages. Otherwise, the game crosses the nuclear threshold and into nuclear holocaust. An excellent job re-creating the Crisis on the High Seas. Thanks for putting it together.
-
Looks like another step taken by India to become the Regional Dominance.
India opens huge new naval baseThe facility will eventually be able to berth 42 ships
India has opened a new naval base on its Arabian Sea coast which it says will become one of the largest in Asia.
The base at Karwar in south-western Karnataka state will have space for 42 warships and deep water for an aircraft carrier and nuclear submarines to dock.
It fulfils a long-standing demand by India's navy for an exclusive facility.
Until now Indian naval bases have had to share space with commercial ports, leaving them congested and vulnerable to attacks.
The BBC's Sunil Raman in Bangalore says the INS Kadamba base covers 4,400 acres and will become the biggest operational base in India.
Delays
"This base is of strategic importance," Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee said at the new base in Karwar.
"With the commissioning of this base, the navy will fulfil the responsibility of defending the country and safeguarding its exclusive economic zone."
The base has been commissioned 19 years after its foundation stone was laid, mainly because of delays due to funding problems.
But in 2000, the Indian government decided to make it a priority and channelled huge funds towards the project.
Presently, the base can berth around 11 ships but the number will rise to 42 in the next couple of years.
A ship-lifting system built by European engine maker Rolls Royce at a cost of $35m will become operational by the end of this year.
-
Royal Navy 'Robots' to Hunt Down Underwater Mine Menace
UK Ministry of Defence
May 30, 2005, 13:10
The Royal Navy is to take delivery of a fleet of high-tech unmanned underwater 'robots' to help track down deadly sea mines.
Known as REMUS - short for Remote Environmental Monitoring Units, the battery-powered vehicles will scan the seabed in water up to 100 m deep to ensure there are no underwater mines lurking to destroy ships and landing craft.
Under the £2.75 million programme 10 vehicles will be bought by the Defence Procurement Agency before entering service early next year. It will be the first time the RN has had an advanced unmanned underwater vehicle capable of detecting hidden shallow water mines - traditionally a dangerous job that has been carried out by naval divers.
Defence Procurement Minister Lord Drayson said:
"REMUS will give the Royal Navy the ability to undertake rapid mine reconnaissance in very shallow water - cold and dangerous work in an area which up until now could only be done by divers. It is an advanced new capability that I am delighted to say will not only reduce the risk to divers during mine detection operations, but also help the Royal Navy undertake a wide range of other important tasks, from supporting search and salvage operations to protecting our ports and harbours against terrorist attack."
Sea mines are one of the most deadly threats facing our naval forces, relatively cheap and easy to plant they can cause major problems for amphibious forces and are often notoriously difficult to detect.
The 1.6 m long torpedo shaped vehicles use advanced detectors to pin-point the location of mines, before returning to their naval handlers for the raw data to be collected and evaluated.
There are some jobs however that the REMUS robots cannot do - the task of clearing the mines it finds will still fall to highly trained naval divers.
The vehicles, manufactured by Hydroid Inc, are expected to stay in service until 2011, and are part of an ongoing initiative by the MOD to introduce unmanned equipment to undertake hazardous tasks.
URL of this article:
http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_002459.shtml
Source(©): UK Ministry of Defence
-
30th Scenario posted this year!
Freek Schepers has posted his latest scenario. This is his first scenario to use the Colonial Wars database by Paul Bridge. We sincerely hope that it is not his last for this database.
CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS
In this scenario the forces are arranged as they were in the Caribbean on October 22nd 1962; the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
After the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961, Cuba started re-arming with the most modern Soviet weapon systems. MiG-19 and -21 fighters armed with Atoll-AAM, SSM-armed missile boats, and SA-2 SAMs have been supplied to Cuba in early 1962. Training has been provided in the USSR and Soviet advisors and training units were moved to Cuba.
Early 1962: US recon planes spotted construction activity of what were evaluated to be missile launch pads and fleet harbours suitable for nuclear submarines.
Early October: Soviet merchant ships with covered tube-like deck cargo were spotted in the Dardanelles and in the G-I-UK gap heading southwestwardly. Submarines were also detected moving into the Atlantic by the brand-new but imperfect SOSUS sensors.
At the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis, these ships are approaching Cuba, where Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles are thought to be near operational status...
Author: Freek Schepers
This and other great scenarios can be found at:
-
AAR: Spanish Fury
by Mark Gellis
Task Group Andalucia immediately reported multiple air contacts rising from Algerian runways. It looked as though the Algerian government was not going to take the Spanish ultimatum lying down and were serious about defending their sovereignty. To compound matters, an unknown subsea contact was reported by FFG Reina Sofia. Unfortunately, the Senior Officer Present Afloat [sOPA], was unable to launch any helos to prosecute her as they would be flying amidst numerous hostile Algerian jets and helos simply cannot evade jet fighters. They would have to investigate the old-fashioned way and run down the contact with their hull-mounted sonar. This was a very dangerous proposition as the range of the torpedoes known to be used by Algerian submarines was much longer than the ships' effective sonar range. For the thousandth time, the SOPA cursed the bureaucrats and politicians in Madrid. "It's so easy for them to issue decrees and ultimatums and so difficult to give us what we need to enforce them." With another snort of disgust, he walked back into the Combat Information Centre [CIC].
The number of Algerian air patrols was indicative of a very determined defence. Antiquated MiG-21 Fishbeds along with high-performance Foxbats climbed to attack altitude from Es Seina aerodrome while ultra-modern Fulcrum interceptors patrolled over Ain Oussera air base. Spain would have no easy ride today. I ordered my reconnaissance elements to head for Ain Oussera just slightly ahead of the strike elements. However, the strike was postponed in the face of the large number of defending fighters. Obviously, some of them would have to be culled before the strikers could be sent in.
Not surprisingly, the enemy had his own version of the playbook. Radar aboard the FF Mendez Nunez reported missiles inbound. C.801 Anti-Ship Missiles [AShMs] had been launched by the Fencers. The SOPA immediately ordered all radar activated and all Weapons Free. Every ship began to manoeuvre wildly. When under this type of attack, it would be every ship for itself.
The missiles were intercepted successfully with a wide margin of safety. However, the bad news was only beginning. Six Fencers were still closing on the Task Group and many long-ranged SAMs had been expended. The Foxbats were doing an excellent job keeping my defending Hornets occupied. They'd launch AA-6 Acrid AAMs and force my Combat Air Patrols [CAP] to flee and prevent them from engaging the Fencers. A very nicely coordinated attack. It almost worked. One flight of Hornets managed to break free of the melee and bagged the strikers with the last of their missiles.
Meanwhile, other Hornets were vainly trying to engage the Fulcrum. The low radar cross-section of the MiG-29 kept causing them to fade off of the fighters' radar. A long-range missile exchange ensued with neither side gaining the advantage. Most of the fighters depleted their long-range missiles quickly and were about to return to base when a veritable flock of Fencer fighter-bombers was detected closing on Spain. Even if the fighters only had Sidewinders remaining, they would have to try and intercept. They got most of the Fencers but two managed to get within range of FF Andalucia and release their AShMs. The FF brought them down with her Standard SAMs.
The recon mission was re-launched to localize the enemy bunkers. On their ingress, they detected a force of three missile boats. It looked like TG Andalucia was not going to have a pleasant day. The air strike would not have a milk run, either, as no less than six SA-6 SAM batteries were detected. One RF-4C inadvertently overflew an SA-6 site that had been cunningly placed on the ingress route and was forced to evade. She was successful, this time.
After three separate attempts to penetrate the SAM bubble over Ain Ouessa and three hasty retreats all the while being chased by SAMs, the mission commander decided that the only way to penetrate the zone would be in the company of SEAD aircraft. All aircraft were recalled to prepare for a full force mission. Meanwhile, the Orions, now free from aerial interception, were able to successfully prosecute a Kilo-class diesel submarine that had been harassing the Andalucia group.
The situation should have been well in hand. Aerial supremacy had been achieved and preparations were underway to eliminate the primary targets. However, the SOPA underestimated the potency and range of the Algerian missile boats. In fact, he just plain forgot about them. The next thing he knew, missiles were detected inbound - SS-N-25 Switchblade! The tiny group fought valiantly, but their Surface-to-Air Missiles had been severely depleted in their repeated engagements with the Fencers. True to their name, the approaching missiles struck like a dagger between the ribs. All three vessels were hit by multiple missiles and slipped beneath the waves. Right away, Victory was wrenched from my grasp and awarded to Algeria; a sad day for Spanish men at arms.
Thanks for sharing another interesting scenario with a whole range of platforms new to the HCDB.
This scenario can be found in either the SZO File Archives or the
-
Pakistan admits defense role of China-built Gwadar port
Special to World Tribune.com
Thursday, May 26, 2005
The Chinese-built port facility at Gwadar, on the Indian Ocean in western Pakistan, will be used for defense purposes, a Pakistani admiral said.
Gwadar is seen as part of Beijing's 'string of pearls' strategy to secure sea routes for oil from the Middle East.
Chief of Naval Staff Adm. Shahid Karimullah said at a conference on April 26 that while the port is also a commercial facility it will also be used by warships.
Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf said last year that the port would be strictly a commercial facility and scoffed at the idea that Chinese warships would use it.
The Chinese are believed to be planning to use the port as part of Beijing's "string of pearls" strategy of protecting sea lanes for oil shipments from the Middle East to China.
The conference include military participants from Bahrain, China, Nigeria, Palestine, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Turkey and the UAE.
The naval chief said Pakistan had ordered F-22P frigates from China as part of its growing defense needs.
The admiral also said Pakistan has two Agosta 90-B submarines in its fleet and is working on a third. "Efforts made towards self-reliance in submarine construction will not restrict us to constructing Agosta class submarines only but other submarine designs offered will be taken into consideration," he said.
-
29th Scenario posted this year!
Mark Gellis has posted another challenging scenario. Thanks for sharing your work with the community.
Operation Spanish Fury - BAT10D2 - EC2003 MEDC
A few years in the future... Revolutions in Algeria, Libya, and Egypt have left these countries in the grip of radical Islamic governments that are hostile to the United States and the European Union.
In recent months, there have been a number of terrorist attacks in Spain. While the Algerian government is not directly responsible for these attacks, they have fostered an atmosphere of hatred against the E.U. and they have done nothing to prevent terrorists from organizing and training in their country. Spain has decided to destroy three command bunkers in Algeria in retaliation for the recent terrorist attacks. The purpose of this attack is not only to reduce the effectiveness of the Algerian military but also to send their government a message.
Author: Mark Gellis
This scenario can be found either in the
This scenario requires Harpoon Classic version 16b8 or later and also the HCDB_050510 or later in order to function properly. The HCDB can be found at:
-
No More U.S. Battleships?
"For the first time since the 1890s, the U.S. Navy soon could be without a battleship," Defense News says.
The Senate, in its version of the fiscal 2006 defense authorization bill, authorizes the Navy to dispose of the battleship Wisconsin and transfer it to the state of Virginia.
And a provision in the House version of the defense bill would transfer the battleship Iowa to the Port of Stockton, Calif.
Only two battleships remain in Navy custody: the Wisconsin, berthed at Nauticus maritime center in downtown Norfolk, Va., and the Iowa, moored in a mothball fleet at Suisun Bay, Calif. Per an agreement dating from the 1990s between the Navy and the Senate, the ships have been kept because their 16-inch guns can provide fire support for Marines on shore. The agreement mandates the Navy to keep the ships until an equal or greater fire support capability is operational.
But the Extended-Range Guided Munition (ERGM) intended to provide that new capability remains mired in developmental problems, and it’s not clear when — or even if — that weapon ever will be fielded.
Two other ships in the four-ship Iowa class, the Missouri and New Jersey are now museum ships in Hawaii and New Jersey, respectively.
-
Afghanistan/U.S.: 'Strategic Partnership' Seen As Move Toward De Facto Rights For U.S. Bases
By Ron Synovitz
The strategic partnership agreed to at the White House on 23 May by U.S. President George W. Bush and Afghan President Hamid Karzai seeks to ensure long-term cooperation between the two governments. In their memorandum of understanding, Bush pledged continued help to strengthen security forces, democracy, and the Afghan economy. Karzai agreed that U.S. forces will continue to have access to the Bagram Air Field north of Kabul and other strategic military installations.
Prague, 25 May 2005 (RFE/RL) -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai says the strategic partnership with the United States he has agreed to is in the best interest of both countries. Karzai says it is necessary because the creation of an Afghan parliament through elections in September will not mean his country is suddenly stable and capable of standing on its own.
"I'm glad that [President Bush] signed with me a memorandum of understanding on the long-term partnership between Afghanistan and the United States of America -- which will make sure that Afghanistan continues to receive reconstruction assistance; which will make sure that Afghanistan continues to receive training from the U.S. for its military and the police; and which will enable Afghanistan to stand on its own feet eventually; and to be a good, active member of the region -- contributing to peace and stability in the region; and to be a bridge between various parts of that part of the world for trade and values," Karzai said.
Bush said the partnership is based on a "strategic vision" against international terrorism, violent religious extremism, and drug trafficking. He said the strategy calls for continued support in the areas of security, democratic reform, and economic reconstruction.
"It's a partnership that establishes regular high-level exchanges on political, security, and economic issues of mutual interests," Bush said. "We will consult with Afghanistan if it perceives its territorial integrity, independence or security is at risk. We will help the Afghan people build strong, lasting government and civic institutions. We will continue to support reconstruction, economic development, and investments that will help educate and build up the skills of the Afghan people."
Analysts who have been studying the details of the joint declaration by Bush and Karzai said they were especially struck by one paragraph. That paragraph says "it is understood" that U.S. military forces will continue to have access to the Bagram Air Field north of Kabul and other strategic military facilities "as may be mutually determined."
It also says U.S. and NATO forces will continue to have "freedom of action" to conduct military operations that are based on "consultations and pre-approved procedures."
Ian Kemp, a London-based independent defense analyst, said such language suggests U.S. military forces will remain at bases in Afghanistan for a long time.
"Any strategic partnership should be to the benefit of both countries," Kemp said. "What the United States would be expecting to supply to the Afghan forces is continuing assistance -- both in terms of training and in terms of equipment. A continuation of what we've seen over the past four years of building up the Afghan security forces themselves. But in return for that, the United States is going to be looking for the basing of U.S. troops and U.S. aircraft in Afghanistan. And also, [the United States will be looking for] host-nation support. And possibly, intelligence."
Anatol Lieven, an expert on Afghanistan at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, agreed that the issue of long-term U.S. military bases is central to the partnership.
"I've always been completely sure that the Americans intended to keep Bagram -- and other places as well -- as permanent bases," Lieven said. "This, I think, will just take things a further step toward formalizing that. It is potentially very, very controversial within Afghanistan. [but] frankly, from Afghanistan's point of view, it probably will be necessary to keep the Americans and NATO around for a very long time to prevent Afghanistan's own inner demons from taking over again."
Lieven said it is significant that Bush spoke of signing "a strategic partnership" while Karzai stressed that their agreement is a "memorandum of understanding." The Afghan Constitution requires parliament to approve formal treaties. But Karzai could have difficulties getting a future parliament to agree to give long-term basing rights to the U.S. military.
"The fact that this document is a 'memorandum of understanding' -- and not a treaty -- is very important," Lieven said. "I don't think that Karzai would dare to submit a treaty agreeing to long-term American basing rights to an Afghan parliament, when and or if the Afghan parliament is ever convoked. I think it would provoke massive resistance. And it could cause a very major political crisis in Afghanistan. The point is, rather, to give all kinds of guarantees to the Americans. But at a less formal level which will allow for de facto basing rights to continue indefinitely and, in return, procure for Karzai and Afghanistan more commitments of American support."
Lieven said the most important aspect of the strategic partnership for Afghanistan is the psychological security it provides. He said it shows that the United States is not considering withdrawal. And that, he said, is essential for keeping European countries and other members of NATO involved in Afghanistan.
Copyright © 2005. RFE/RL, Inc. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036. www.rferl.org
AAR: Guinea [Spoiler Alert]
in Scenario Design & Discussion
AAR: Guinea
By Freek Schepers
My orders were to protect Her Majesty's dominion in New Guinea, a daunting task, indeed. I started by launching most of my Maritime Patrol Aircraft [MPA] to seek out and locate the Indonesians. As with most battles, the initial phase is always about Intelligence. As my MPA spread out from Biak, I was happy to see that they possessed radar more than adequate to search long stretches of water leading me to assume that this battle was going to be a milk run. Well, as every primary school child knows, you never "assume" anything because it makes an "Ass" out of "U" and "Me".
The MPA spread out on their reconnaissance duties while I ordered my ships to potential choke-points that the enemy would, hopefully, be forced to pass through. Sure enough, DD Skoriy was found escorting an LST along with a Komar missile boat just crossing the border near Fakfak. The MPA was loaded with bombs and she immediately proceeded to attack the missile boat. While the DD was far larger and more tempting, the Komar carried Styx SSMs which had much greater range than anything the Dutch navy carried. She was quickly sunk. A follow-up strike by Hunters based at Fakfak sank the DD and the LST was left for the task group to kill with gunfire.
Another landing force was detected NE of Woendi. I ordered SS Dolfijn to intercept and authorized an impromptu attack by the MPA, as well. This was a big task force so I focused my attacks on ASW-capable vessels in hopes of opening a breach in the defences for my submarine to exploit. She was able to sink one frigate [FF] but then my MPA was blown out of the sky from the intense AAA fire. I immediately launched the bombers from Sorong in hopes of widening the gap. They showed up and sank the DD escort. The PhibRon now lay naked and was pretty much defenceless for my submarine.
The Indonesian air force retaliated quickly and efficiently by striking my air bases at Fakfak and Sorong; putting both out of commission and destroying their aircraft on the tarmac. My Hunter interceptors were simply too far away in Biak to render any meaningful assistance. Another landing force was spotted near Doka island. Again, the MPA proceeded to make a hasty attack that destroyed two escorts before retiring to keep the TF under radar surveillance.
Two more landing groups were detected to the NW of New Guinea. Indonesia was pulling out all the stops for this invasion. The MPA that located them put in an attack and killed another ASW-escort so that SS Seeleeuw could make an easier approach for her torpedoes. Smaldeel 4.1 squadron, consisting of three destroyers, was given an intercept vector for these 23 ships. Also, a number of small gunboats were detected near Sorong. A quick pass by fighters destroyed two and the survivors were chased down and destroyed by Smaldeel 4.3 squadron that had been sent to protect the nearby chokepoint.
I decided not to re-arm my MPA after they had expended their ordnance because I felt that I needed their 'eyes' more than I needed their brawn. Then the Indonesian fighters started appearing throughout the AO. The MPA were pursued mercilessly all the while calling for fighters from my sole surviving base at Biak and Biak was a long ways away. Only by continuously shuttling fighters out to protect the MPA did enough survive to maintain contact with the enemy landing forces. Often, the MPA pilots found themselves surrounded by enemy fighters and forced to evade aggressively.
As Smaldeel 4.1 raced to intercept the Indonesian invasion forces, a lookout reported, "Periscoop zichtbaar aan bakboord! Binnen schootsafstand!" << Periscope feather off the port bow! Two points below the horizon! >> That was within torpedo range! The squadron commander ordered immediate evasive action and all three ships were told to scatter at flank speed. Two MPA were pulled away from their surveillance duties to drop depth charges on her with no sign of success. Since I had no additional ASW weapons available, I ordered Smaldeel 4.1 to take a wide detour around the submarine since her torpedoes would easily out-range my own ship-borne ASW weapons.
The enemy fighters were really bad news. They killed more than one MPA before finally being suppressed by my over-worked escorts. However, the MPA survived long enough to see the Dolfijn penetrate the screen of the force aimed at Sorong and then proceeding to sink every vessel within the group. Her colleague, Seeleeuw, was also able to penetrate a second landing force to slaughter the troop-laden transports. With over 50% of their landing forces destroyed for little gain, Victory was granted to the Dutch. Sukarno's plans for expansion would have to wait for another day.
This is an excellent scenario. The shorter-ranged weapons make for very interesting encounters. The action is constant and unrelenting and made for a very exciting time for my MPA assets. Thanks to Frans Koenz for his linguistic assistance in writing this AAR.
StrategyZone Online hosts the greatest collection of quality scenarios for Harpoon3 and Harpoon Classic on the web. Check it out in the SZO File Archives.