Wednesday, March 18, 2009

India Unhappy With Hawk, Plans New Trainer Competition / IAF Plans For Additional Hawks Jet Trainers Shelved

India Unhappy With Hawk, Plans New Trainer Competition / IAF Plans For Additional Hawks Jet Trainers Shelved
(NSI News Source Info) NEW DELHI - March 18, 2009: Upset over problems relating to spares supply for British Hawk Advanced Jet Trainers (AJTs), India has shelved plans to place follow-on orders for the aircraft and instead floated new tenders to supplement its trainer fleet.
The Hawk Mk. 132 is the latest export variant of the Hawk and was previously known as the Mk.115Y. The Mk.132 formally entered service with the Indian Air Force (IAF) on 23 February 2008 after one of the most protracted procurement processes in India's history, with two decades having elapsed between the initial interest and the contract signing on 26 March 2004. The IAF will receive 24 aircraft directly from BAE Systems, with deliveries beginning in November 2007, and the remaining 42 to be assembled by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited between 2008 and 2011. HAL handed over the first locally-built Hawk 132 to the IAF on 14 August 2008. These aircraft will be powered by Rolls Royce Mk 871 turbo fan engine. In February 2008, India was planning to order 57 more Hawks, with 40 going to the Indian Air Force and the remaining 17 to the Indian Navy, however it looks like this has been shelved. The Indian Air Force (IAF) is reportedly unhappy with the spares supply situation and has issued new Request for Proposals (RFP) for a trainer craft.
Indian Air Force (IAF) sources said here on Tuesday that the new tenders -- Request for Proposals (RFP) in defence parlance -- were issued about a month ago to six global aircraft manufacturers.
Surprisingly, UK-based Hawks manufacturer BAE Systems finds a place among the six companies which had received the fresh tenders. But it was being approached for an upgraded version of the AJTs, sources said.
Others trainers that the IAF has shown interest in and sent the tender papers to were Italy’s Alenia for the M-346, Korean T-50s, the Chez L-159, Russian YAK-130 and MiG AT Trainer, sources said.
After a procurement process that lasted nearly 20 years, India finally entered a contract for the delivery of 66 Hawks trainers with BAE in 2004. The contract had an in-built provision for a follow-on order for 40 more aircraft.
But the Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) had been finding it difficult to maintain the production lines for the aircraft at its facility due to considerable delays in spares supplies, sources said.
The move of the IAF to go in for a new brand of trainer aircraft came as a surprise, as it had originally planned to have a single type of trainers in the fleet to train future fighter pilots.

Pakistan: Attack Stops Traffic On NATO Supply Line / Attack Stops Traffic On NATO Supply Line / Bomb Damages NATO Equipment In Pakistan

Pakistan: Attack Stops Traffic On NATO Supply Line / Attack Stops Traffic On NATO Supply Line / Bomb Damages NATO Equipment In Pakistan
(NSI News Source Info) QUETTA, Pakistan - March 18, 2009: A man in Pakistan on March 18 hurled a grenade at a NATO supply truck carrying machinery destined for Afghanistan, damaging the equipment, police said. Pakistani security officials examine a truck after a bomb attack in Chaman, a Pakistani town along Afghan border, Wednesday, March 18, 2009. Two men on a motorcycle threw a bomb at the truck carrying an excavating machine to NATO troops in Afghanistan, halting traffic along a supply route through Pakistan's southwest, officials said. The attacker threw the hand grenade as trucks loaded with supplies waited for customs clearance near the Chaman border crossing in southwestern Baluchistan province, local police officer Gul Mohammad said. "Soon after the grenade blast, people saw a man fleeing the area, and (he) disappeared in the rush," he said, quoting witnesses. The truck was carrying a machine for drilling wells. The blast caused "minor damage" to the machine and no casualties, the officer said. The crossing was briefly closed to trucks after the attack, for which nobody has claimed responsibility. NATO and US-led forces in landlocked Afghanistan are hugely dependent on Pakistan for supplies and equipment, about 80 percent of which is transported through the troubled country. Baluchistan has been rocked by a four-year insurgency waged by tribal rebels fighting for political autonomy and a greater share of profits from the region's natural resources. The province has also been hit by attacks blamed on Taliban militants.

U.K. To Buy 3 JSFs For Tests Before STOVL Decision

U.K. To Buy 3 JSFs For Tests Before STOVL Decision
(NSI News Source Info) LONDON - March 18, 2009: Britain is to purchase three Joint Strike Fighters to carry out operational test-and-evaluation work ahead of a decision to acquire the F-35B STOVL variant to equip two new Royal Navy aircraft carriers. The JSF program was designed to replace the F-16, A-10, F/A-18 and AV-8B fleet of tactical fighter aircraft in U.S. military service. A common design would keep development, production, and operating costs down. This was pursued by building three variants of one aircraft, sharing 80% of their parts: *F-35A, conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant. *F-35B, short-takeoff and vertical-landing (STOVL) variant. *F-35C, carrier-based (CV) variant. The F-35 is being designed to be the world's premier strike aircraft through 2040. It is intended that its close and long-range air-to-air capability will be second only to that of the F-22 Raptor. Specifically the F-35’s requirements are that it be: four times more effective than legacy fighters in air-to-air combat, eight times more effective in air-to-ground battle combat, and three times more effective in reconnaissance and suppression of air defenses. These capabilities are to be achieved while still having significantly better range and require less logistics support than legacy aircraft. With takeoff weights up to 60,000 lb (27,000 kg), the F-35 is considerably heavier than the original lightweight fighter designs it replaces. In empty and maximum gross weights, it more closely resembles the single-seat, single-engine F-105 Thunderchief which was the largest single engine fighter of the Vietnam era. The announcement of the purchase came March 18 as British Defence Secretary John Hutton visited Washington for three days of talks with members of the new Obama administration and others. With the Ministry of Defence budget under severe pressure, the British government has been toying with the idea of not acquiring low-rate initial-production aircraft for its test program to save cash. Italy decided not to join the test-and-evaluation element of the JSF program late last year for budget reasons. The purchase deal is expected to cost the MoD in excess of 400 million pounds ($562.4 million). A ministry spokesman said the military is expected to take possession of the aircraft in 2011 or 2012. The British will initially join the test program being conducted by their U.S. counterparts. The aircraft will eventually fly off the two 65,000-ton Queen Elizabeth-class carriers due to be handed over starting in 2015. The carriers, though, are likely to enter service carrying Harrier GR9s operated jointly by the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force.

Hamas Not Budging In Israel, Fatah Talks / Egypt Seeks Softer US Hamas Line

Hamas Not Budging In Israel, Fatah Talks / Egypt Seeks Softer US Hamas Line
(NSI News Source Info) KHAN YOUNIS, Gaza Strip - March 18, 2009: An opening of Gaza’s blockaded borders, access to billions of dollars in foreign aid, a popularity boost — Hamas would have much to gain by working out a prisoner swap with Israel and a power-sharing arrangement with its West Bank rivals. Instead, Gaza’s Islamic militant rulers have been sticking to their demands, even though that would seem to be hurting their interests. But some analysts suggest that Hamas believes time is on its side and that Israel, along with moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the West, will eventually give in. Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal attends a meeting with parliament members from Greece and Italy in Damascus March 18, 2009. "They are not acting like people who are negotiating from a position of weakness," said Robert Blecher, an analyst with the International Crisis Group think tank. Egypt has been mediating parallel sets of talks involving Hamas — with Israel on exchanging a captured Israeli soldier, Gilad Schalit, for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, and with Abbas’ Fatah movement on a transitional government that would pave the way for new elections. Hamas wants Israel to release 450 prisoners with lengthy terms for Schalit, and resists demands by Abbas that the unity government commit to the Palestine Liberation Organization program, including its recognition of Israel. In both cases, Hamas is refusing to make concessions that could lead to a lifting of the Gaza closure, imposed by Israel and Egypt after Hamas’ violent takeover there in 2007. "Hamas is sticking to its demands," spokesman Ayman Taha said after the failure of the prisoner talks Tuesday, even adding a threat that Hamas would try to capture more Israeli soldiers. On Wednesday, Hamas’ military wing said it might harden demands in future talks. Hamas’ defiance comes, in part, from surviving the border blockade and Israel’s recent military offensive in Gaza, which served to emphasize how hard it would be to bring Hamas down. Ending Gaza’s isolation has become more urgent since the war — reconstruction requires open borders and huge sums in foreign aid, already promised by donor countries. But several Hamas officials said the group is in no hurry. On the prisoner swap, Hamas expects to see its demands met if it waits long enough. "We believe the occupation (Israel) is going to retreat," said Osama Muzini, a Hamas spokesman. In the final stage of negotiations over prisoners this weekend, outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to free 320 prisoners of the 450 Hamas was demanding. Compromise on the prisoners might be seen in Gaza as inadequate compensation for the hardship that befell the territory after Hamas-allied militants captured Schalit in a cross-border raid in 2006. Israel closed Gaza’s borders, bombed Gaza’s only power station and unleashed military strikes that killed hundreds. Hamas is also under pressure from the families of prisoners not to leave any lifers behind. "Getting the prisoners out is more important than open borders," 70-year-old Khadije Salameh said Tuesday, flanked in her living room in the town of Khan Younis by the gold-framed posters of her imprisoned sons Hassan and Akram.
Hassan Salameh is among the 11 prisoners Israel says it will never free. Arrested in 1995, he is serving 48 life terms for masterminding several suicide bombings that killed dozens of Israelis. The release of the 11 names and Olmert’s pledge not to lift the blockade without Schalit will tie the hands of his designated successor, hard-line Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu. Hamas could have a tough time getting a better deal from Netanyahu. The deadlock complicates the international community’s plans for Gaza reconstruction. "We are not able to bring anything in for rebuilding Gaza until the case of the Israeli soldier Schalit is resolved, and that’s what the Israelis are telling us," Karen Abu Zayd, who runs the major U.N. aid agency in Gaza, said Tuesday. Donor countries are ready to give billions of dollars to fix the war damage, including repairing or rebuilding 15,000 homes, but can’t do so without open borders and won’t give the money to Hamas. The purpose of the Palestinian unity talks is to form an interim government made up of both rival factions until new elections are held by January 2010. Such an arrangement would let funds start flowing, but would force Hamas to soften its opposition to Israel. And Hamas can’t afford to compromise on its principles, especially with the possibility of elections in less than a year, said Hani Basoos, a Gaza analyst now based in Europe. Hamas is committed to Israel’s destruction, in contrast to Fatah, which seeks a Palestinian state alongside Israel. An implicit recognition of Israel would also undercut Hamas’ main argument in any election campaign that Fatah’s 16 years of peace talks with Israel have been a waste of time. Hamas has shown that its stubbornness is not a negotiating tactic, Basoos said. "If they wanted to compromise, they would have done it last year or the year before," he said. "It is a waiting game."

President Barack Obama Soothes China On Multi-Billion-Dollar US Debt

President Barack Obama Soothes China On Multi-Billion-Dollar US Debt
(NSI News Source Info) Washington - March 18, 2009: President Barack Obama said Saturday that China could have "absolute confidence" in the American economy, after Beijing pointedly questioned the safety of its huge haul of US government debt. Obama took up comments by China's Premier Wen Jiabao on Friday, which represented a rare assessment by Beijing on the health of the US economy and the prospects for China's hundreds of billions of dollars in Treasury bonds. "Not just the Chinese government, but every investor can have absolute confidence in the soundness of investments in the United States," Obama said after meeting Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva at the White House. "There is a reason why even in the midst of this economic crisis you have seen actual increases in investment flows here in the US." "I think it is a recognition that the stability not only of our economic system but also our political system is extraordinary." Obama said that his comments were applicable to both US Treasury instruments and investments in the US private and industrial sectors. Wen told reporters in Beijing on Friday that he was concerned about China's huge stake in the US economy as it endures the worst crisis in generations. "We have lent huge amounts of money to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets," Wen said. "To be honest, I am a little bit worried and I would like to ... call on the United States to honor its word and remain a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets." Wen's comments caused a stir in global markets, and were the latest disturbance to the critical US-Chinese relationship early in Obama's administration. Last week, military tensions rose after the United States said Chinese boats harassed the US Navy surveillance vessel Impeccable in the South China Sea, forcing the ship to take emergency action to avoid a collision. Beijing said the vessel was on a spying mission. China also balked at US comments on the human rights situation in Tibet -- but both sides tried to smooth over the row with Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi's visit to the White House on Thursday. Beijing held 727.4 billion dollars in US Treasury bonds at the end of last year, just ahead of Japan, the holder of 626 billion dollars in bonds, according to US government data. As the largest creditor to the United States, China is "extremely interested in developments in the US economy," Wen said. Analysts say a loss of confidence in US Treasury securities could cause a dramatic drop in the dollar and force Washington to pay higher interest rates. In February, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked China to keep on buying US debt, saying it could help jumpstart the flagging US economy and stimulate imports of Chinese goods. "By continuing to support American Treasury instruments the Chinese are recognizing our interconnection. We are truly going to rise or fall together," Clinton said. Most of China's foreign exchange reserves, which reached 1.95 trillion dollars by the end of 2008, is believed to be held in the greenback. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Friday that "there's no safer investment in the world than in the United States." Obama rolled out an audacious 3.55-trillion-dollar budget proposal last month that bristles with economic reforms and spending on healthcare, climate change and education. The budget forecasts a 1.750 trillion dollar deficit in fiscal 2009, but foresees that figure falling to 1.171 trillion dollars in 2010. The Chinese reportedly are concerned about the enormous amount of borrowed money, including Obama's nearly 800-billion-dollar stimulus, being used to boost US growth. Concerns are flaring in China that the stimulus plan could hurt dollar-denominated assets, with some observers urging China to cut US Treasury holdings, the official Xinhua news agency said last month. Domestic critics have charged that, as a developing country, China should be investing at home instead of subsidizing the world's richest country, or else diversifying into other foreign assets.

Navantia Lays Keel for First Spanish OPV / Navantia Lays Keel For Spanish Navy’s First “BAM”

Navantia Lays Keel for First Spanish OPV / Navantia Lays Keel For Spanish Navy’s First “BAM”
(NSI News Source Info) March 18, 2009: On 13th. March, the San Fernando-Puerto Real Shipyard laid the keel for the Spanish Navy’s first ”BAM”. This milestone, which was organised as a work ceremony, sees slipway construction work start on the first of the four ships, which is scheduled for delivery at the end of 2010.
Navantia and the Spanish Navy signed the Work Order on 31 July 2006 for four BAM's whose construction will mean 3,130,000 work hours, 270,000 of which are devoted to engineering tasks.
Its main characteristics are:
- Length Overall 93.90 m
- Maximum Beam 14.20 m
- Depth to Flight Deck: 9.90 m
- Full Load Displacement: 2,505 t
- Average Draft at Full Load: 4.15 m
- Maximum speed: 20.5 kn- Autonomy (at 15 knots): 8,000 miles
- Provisions Autonomy: 35-40 days
- Crew: 35 (+5)
- Transport Personnel: 35 (+1)These ships will be able to carry out diverse missions, such as supporting State Forces and Security Services in the control of maritime zones, sea rescue, protection and control of sea traffic, environmental protection and the fight against pollution, among others.

Turkey and Russia on the Rise

Turkey and Russia on the Rise By Reva Bhalla, Lauren Goodrich and Peter Zeihan STRATFOR
(NSI News Source Info) March 18, 2009: Russian President Dmitri Medvedev reportedly will travel to Turkey in the near future to follow up a recent four-day visit by his Turkish counterpart, Abdullah Gul, to Moscow. The Turks and the Russians certainly have much to discuss. Russia is moving aggressively to extend its influence throughout the former Soviet empire, while Turkey is rousing itself from 90 years of post-Ottoman isolation. Both are clearly ascendant powers, and it would seem logical that the more the two bump up against one other, the more likely they will gird for yet another round in their centuries-old conflict. But while that may be true down the line, the two Eurasian powers have sufficient strategic incentives to work together for now. Russia’s World Russia is among the world’s most strategically vulnerable states. Its core, the Moscow region, boasts no geographic barriers to invasion. Russia must thus expand its borders to create the largest possible buffer for its core, which requires forcibly incorporating legions of minorities who do not see themselves as Russian. The Russian government estimates that about 80 percent of Russia’s approximately 140 million people are actually ethnically Russian, but this number is somewhat suspect, as many minorities define themselves based on their use of the Russian language, just as many Hispanics in the United States define themselves by their use of English as their primary language. Thus, ironically, attaining security by creating a strategic buffer creates a new chronic security problem in the form of new populations hostile t o Moscow’s rule. The need to deal with the latter problem explains the development of Russia’s elite intelligence services, which are primarily designed for and tasked with monitoring the country’s multiethnic population. Russia’s primary challenge, however, is time. In the aftermath of the Soviet collapse, the bottom fell out of the Russian birthrate, with fewer than half the number of babies born in the 1990s than were born in the 1980s. These post-Cold War children are now coming of age; in a few years, their small numbers are going to have a catastrophic impact on the size of the Russian population. By contrast, most non-Russian minorities — in particular those such as Chechens and Dagestanis, who are of Muslim faith — did not suffer from the 1990s birthrate plunge, so their numbers are rapidly increasing even as the number of ethnic Russians is rapidly decreasing. Add in deep-rooted, demographic-impacting problems such as HIV, tuberculosis and heroin abuse — concentrated not just among ethnic Russians but a lso among those of childbearing age — and Russia faces a hard-wired demographic time bomb. Put simply, Russia is an ascending power in the short run, but it is a declining power in the long run. The Russian leadership is well aware of this coming crisis, and knows it is going to need every scrap of strength it can muster just to continue the struggle to keep Russia in one piece. To this end, Moscow must do everything it can now to secure buffers against external intrusion in the not-so-distant future. For the most part, this means rolling back Western influence wherever and whenever possible, and impressing upon states that would prefer integration into the West that their fates lie with Russia instead. Moscow’s natural gas crisis with Ukraine, August 2008 war with Georgia, efforts to eject American forces from Central Asia and constant pressure on the Baltic states all represent efforts to buy Russia more space — and with that space, more time for survival. Expanding its buffer against such a diverse and potentially hostile collection of states is no small order, but Russia does have one major advantage: The security guarantor for nearly all of these countries is the United States, and the United States is currently very busy elsewhere. So long as U.S. ground forces are occupied with the Iraqi and Afghan wars, the Americans will not be riding to the rescue of the states on Russia’s periphery. Given this window of opportunity, the Russians have a fair chance to regain the relative security they seek. In light of the impending demographic catastrophe and the present window of opportunity, the Russians are in quite a hurry to act. Turkey’s World Turkey is in many ways the polar opposite of Russia. After the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire following World War I, Turkey was pared down to its core, Asia Minor. Within this refuge, Turkey is nearly unassailable. It is surrounded by water on three sides, commands the only maritime connection between the Black and Mediterranean seas and sits astride a plateau surrounded by mountains. This is a very difficult chunk of territory to conquer. Indeed, beginning in the Seljuk Age in the 11th century, the ancestors of the modern Turks took the better part of three centuries to seize this territory from its previous occupant, the Byzantine Empire. The Turks have used much of the time since then to consolidate their position such that, as an ethnicity, they reign supreme in their realm. The Persians and Arabs have long since lost their footholds in Anatolia, while the Armenians were finally expelled in the dying days of World War I. Only the Kurds remain, and they do not pose a demographic challenge to the Turks. While Turkey exhibits many of the same demographic tendencies as other advanced developing states — namely, slowing birthrates and a steadily aging population — there is no major discrepancy between Turk and Kurdish birthrates, so the Turks should continue to comprise more than 80 percent of the country’s population for some time to come. Thus, while the Kurds will continue to be a source of nationalistic friction, they do not constitute a fundamental challenge to the power or operations of the Turkish state, like minorities in Russia are destined to do in the years ahead. Turkey’s security is not limited to its core lands. Once one moves beyond the borders of modern Turkey, the existential threats the state faced in years past have largely melted away. During the Cold War, Turkey was locked into the NATO structure to protect itself from Soviet power. But now the Soviet Union is gone, and the Balkans and Caucasus — both former Ottoman provinces — are again available for manipulation. The Arabs have not posed a threat to Anatolia in nearly a millennium, and any contest between Turkey and Iran is clearly a battle of unequals in which the Turks hold most of the cards. If anything, the Arabs — who view Iran as a hostile power with not only a heretical religion but also with a revolutionary foreign policy calling for the overthrow of most of the Arab regimes — are practically welcoming the Turks back. Despite both its imperial past and its close security association with the Americans, the Arabs see Turkey as a trusted mediator, and even an exemplar. With the disappearance of the threats of yesteryear, many of the things that once held Turkey’s undivided attention have become less important to Ankara. With the Soviet threat gone, NATO is no longer critical. With new markets opening up in the former Soviet Union, Turkey’s obsession with seeking EU membership has faded to a mere passing interest. Turkey has become a free agent, bound by very few relationships or restrictions, but dabbling in events throughout its entire periphery. Unlike Russia, which feels it needs an empire to survive, Turkey is flirting with the idea of an empire simply because it can — and the costs of exploring the option are negl igible. Whereas Russia is a state facing a clear series of threats in a very short time frame, Turkey is a state facing a veritable smorgasbord of strategic options under no time pressure whatsoever. Within that disconnect lies the road forward for the two states — and it is a road with surprisingly few clashes ahead in the near term. The Field of Competition There are four zones of overlapping interest for the Turks and Russians. First, the end of the Soviet empire opened up a wealth of economic opportunities, but very few states have proven adept at penetrating the consumer markets of Ukraine and Russia. Somewhat surprisingly, Turkey is one of those few states. Thanks to the legacy of Soviet central planning, Russian and Ukrainian industry have found it difficult to retool away from heavy industry to produce the consumer goods much in demand in their markets. Because most Ukrainians and Russians cannot afford Western goods, Turkey has carved out a robust and lasting niche with its lower-cost exports; it is now the largest supplier of imports to the Russian market. While this is no exercise in hard power, this Turkish penetration nevertheless is cause for much concern among Russian authorities. So far, Turkey has been scrupulous about not politicizing these useful trade links beyond some intelligence-gathering efforts (particularly in Ukraine). Considering Russia’s current financial problems, having a stable source of consumer goods — especially one that is not China — is actually seen as a positive. At least for now, the Russian government would rather see its trade relationship with Turkey stay strong. There will certainly be a clash later — either as Russia weakens or as Turkey becomes more ambitious — but for now, the Russians are content with the trade relationship. Second, the Russian retreat in the post-Cold War era has opened up the Balkans to Turkish influence. Romania, Bulgaria and the lands of the former Yugoslavia are all former Ottoman possessions, and in their day they formed the most advanced portion of the Ottoman economy. During the Cold War, they were all part of the Communist world, with Romania and Bulgaria formally incorporated into the Soviet bloc. While most of these lands are now absorbed into the European Union, Russia’s ties to its fellow Slavs — most notably the Serbs and Bulgarians — have allowed it a degree of influence that most Europeans choose to ignore. Additionally, Russia has long held a friendly relationship with Greece and Cyprus, both to complicate American policy in Europe and to provide a flank against Turkey. Still, thanks to proximity and trading links, Turkey clearly holds the upper hand in this theater of competition. But this particular region is unlikely to generate much Turkish-Russian animosity, simply because both countries are in the process of giving up. Most of the Balkan states are already members of an organization that is unlikely to ever admit Russia or Turkey: the European Union. Russia simply cannot meet the membership criteria, and Cyprus’ membership in essence strikes the possibility of Turkish inclusion. (Any EU member can veto the admission of would-be members.) The EU-led splitting of Kosovo from Serbia over Russian objections was a body blow to Russian power in the region, and the subsequent EU running of Kosovo as a protectorate greatly limited Turkish influence as well. Continuing EU expansion means that Turkish influence in the Balkans will shrivel just as Russian influence already has. Trouble this way lies, but not between Turkey and Russia. If anything, their joint exclusion might provide some room for the two to agree on something. The third area for Russian-Turkish competition is in energy, and this is where things get particularly sticky. Russia is Turkey’s No. 1 trading partner, with energy accounting for the bulk of the trade volume between the two countries. Turkey depends on Russia for 65 percent of its natural gas and 40 percent of its oil imports. Though Turkey has steadily grown its trade relationship with Russia, it does not exactly approve of Moscow’s penchant for using its energy relations with Europe as a political weapon. Russia has never gone so far as to cut supplies to Turkey directly, but Turkey has been indirectly affected more than once when Russia decided to cut supplies to Ukraine because Moscow felt the need to reassert its writ in Kiev. Sharing the Turks’ energy anxiety, the Europeans have been more than eager to use Turkey as an energy transit hub for routes that would bypass the Russians altogether in supplying the European market. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline is one such route, and others, like Nabucco, are still stuck in the planning stages. The Russians have every reason to pressure the Turks into staying far away from any more energy diversification schemes that could cost Russia one of its biggest energy clients — and deny Moscow much of the political leverage it currently holds over the Europeans who are dependent on the Russian energy network. There are only two options for the Turks in diversifying away from the Russians. The first lies to Turkey’s south in Iraq and Iran. Turkey has big plans for Iraq’s oil industry, but it will still take considerable time to upgrade and restore the oil fields and pipelines that have been persistently sabotaged and ransacked by insurgents during the fighting that followed the 2003 U.S. invasion. The Iranians offer another large source of energy for the Turks to tap into, but the political complications attached to dealing with Iran are still too prickly for the Turks to move ahead with concrete energy deals at this time. Complications remain for now, but Turkey wi ll be keeping an eye on its Middle Eastern neighbors for robust energy partnerships in the future. The second potential source of energy for the Turks lies in Central Asia, a region that Russia must keep in its grip at all costs if it hopes to survive in the long run. In many ways this theater is the reverse of the Balkans, where the Russians hold the ethnic links and the Turks the economic advantage. Here, four of the five Central Asian countries — Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan — are Turkic. But as a consequence of the Soviet years, the infrastructure and economies of all four are so hardwired into the Russian sphere of influence that it would take some major surgery to liberate them. But the prize is a rich one: Central Asia possesses the world& #8217;s largest concentration of untapped energy reserves. And as the term “central” implies, whoever controls the region can project power into the former Soviet Union, China and South Asia. If the Russians and Turks are going to fight over something, this is it. Here Turkey faces a problem, however — it does not directly abut the region. If the Turks are even going to attempt to shift the Central Asian balance of power, they will need a lever. This brings us to the final — and most dynamic — realm of competition: the Caucasus. Turkey here faces the best and worst in terms of influence projection. The Azerbaijanis do not consider themselves simply Turkic, like the Central Asians, but actually Turkish. If there is a country in the former Soviet Union that would consider not only allying with but actually joining with another state to escape Russia’s orbit, it would be Azerbaijan with Turkey. Azerbaijan has its own significant energy supplies, but its real value is in serving as a willing springboard for Turkish influence into Central Asia. However, the core of Azerbaijan does not border Turkey. Instead, it is on the other side of Armenia, a country that thrashed Azerbaijan in a war over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh enclave and still has lingering animosities toward Ankara because of the 1915 Armenian “genocide.” Armenia has sold itself to the Russians to keep its Turkish foes at bay. This means Turkish designs on Central Asia all boil down to the former Soviet state of Georgia. If Turkey can bring Georgia fully under its wing, Turkey can then set about to integrate with Azerbaijan and project influence into Central Asia. But without Georgia, Turkey is hamstrung before it can even begin to reach for the real prize in Central Asia. In this, the Turks do not see the Georgians as much help. The Georgians do not have much in the way of a functional economy or military, and they have consistently overplayed their hand with the Russians in the hopes that the West would come to their aid. Such miscalculations contributed to the August 2008 Georgian-Russian war, in which Russia smashed what military capacity the Georgians did possess. So while Ankara sees the Georgians as reliably anti-Russian, it does not see them as reliably competent or capable. This means that Turkish-Russian competition may have been short-circuited before it even began. Meanwhile, the Americans and Russians are beginning to outline the rudiments of a deal. Various items on the table include Russia allowing the Americans to ship military supplies to Afghanistan via Russia’s sphere of influence, changes to the U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) program, and a halt to NATO expansion. The last prong is a critical piece of Russian-Turkish competition. Should the Americans and Europeans put their weight behind NATO expansion, Georgia would be a logical candidate — meaning most of the heavy lifting in terms of Turkey projecting power eastward would already be done. But if the Americans and Europeans do not put their weight behind NATO expansion, Georgia would fall by the wayside and Turkey would have to do all the work of projecting power eastward — and facing the Russians — alone. A Temporary Meeting of Minds? There is clearly no shortage of friction points between the Turks and the Russians. With the two powers on a resurgent path, it was only a matter of time before they started bumping into one another. The most notable clash occurred when the Russians decided to invade Georgia last August, knowing full well that neither the Americans nor the Europeans would have the will or capability to intervene on behalf of the small Caucasian state. NATO’s strongest response was a symbolic show of force that relied on Turkey, as the gatekeeper to the Black Sea, to allow a buildup of NATO vessels near the Georgian coast and threaten the underbelly of Russia’s former Soviet peri phery. Turkey disapproved of the idea of Russian troops bearing down in the Caucasus near the Turkish border, and Ankara was also angered by having its energy revenues cut off during the war when the BTC pipeline was taken offline. The Russians promptly responded to Turkey’s NATO maneuvers in the Black Sea by holding up a large amount of Turkish goods at various Russian border checkpoints to put the squeeze on Turkish exports. But the standoff was short-lived; soon enough, the Turks and Russians came to the negotiating table to end the trade spat and sort out their respective spheres of influence. The Russian-Turkish negotiations have progressed over the past several months, with Russian and Turkish leaders now meeting fairly regularly to sort out the issues where both can find some mutual benefit. The first area of cooperation is Europe, where both Russia and Turkey have an interest in applying political pressure. Despite Europe’s objections and rejections, the Turks are persistent in their ambitions to become a member of the European Union. At the same time, the Russians need to keep Europe linked into the Russian energy network and divided over any plans for BMD, NATO expansion or any other Western plan that threatens Russian national security. As long as Turkey stalls on any European energy diversification projects, the more it can demand Europe’s attention on the issue of EU membership. In fact, the Turks already threatened as much at the start of the year, when they said outright that if Europe doesn’t need Turkey as an EU member, then Turkey doesn’t need to sign off on any more energy diversification projects that transit Turkish territory. Ankara’s threats against Europe dovetailed nicely with Russia’s natural gas cutoff to Ukraine in January, when the Europeans once again were reminded of Moscow’s energy wrath. The Turks and the Russians also can find common ground in the Middle East. Turkey is again expanding its influence deep into its Middle Eastern backyard, and Ankara expects to take the lead in handling the thorny issues of Iran, Iraq and Syria as the United States draws down its presence in the region and shifts its focus to Afghanistan. What the Turks want right now is stability on their southern flank. That means keeping Russia out of mischief in places like Iran, where Moscow has threatened to sell strategic S-300 air defense systems and to boost the Iranian nuclear program in order to grab Washington’s attention on other issues deemed vital to Moscow’s national security interests. The United States is already leaning on Russia to pressure Iran in return for other strategic concessions, and the Turks are just as interested as the Americans in taming Russia’s actions in the Middle East. Armenia is another issue where Russia and Turkey may be having a temporary meeting of minds. Russia unofficially occupies Armenia and has been building up a substantial military presence in the small Caucasian state. Turkey can either sit back, continue to isolate Armenia and leave it for the Russians to dominate through and through, or it can move toward normalizing relations with Yerevan and dealing with Russia on more equal footing in the Caucasus. With rumors flying of a deal on the horizon between Yerevan and Ankara (likely with Russia’s blessing), it appears more and more that the Turks and the Russians are making progress in sorting out their respective spheres of influence. Ultimately, both Russia and Turkey know that this relationship is likely temporary at best. The two Eurasian powers still distrust each other and have divergent long-term goals, even if in the short term there is a small window of opportunity for Turkish and Russian interests to overlap. The law of geopolitics dictates that the two ascendant powers are doomed to clash — just not today.

DTN News: Lockheed Martin ~ Leading Technology Users And Providers to Form DASH7™ Alliance to Advance Wireless Data Technology

DTN News: Lockheed Martin ~ Leading Technology Users And Providers to Form DASH7™ Alliance to Advance Wireless Data Technology *Source: DTN News / Lockheed Martin (NSI News Source Info) Mountain View, Calif. - March 18, 2009: Michelin, Lockheed Martin’s Savi Technology, Texas Instruments and others are forming the DASH7™ Alliance, a cross-industry initiative to expand the use of a wireless data technology commonly used in the global defense industry but increasingly used by commercial customers. The U.S. Department of Energy and three of its laboratories, Argonne National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, as well as the University of Pittsburgh plan to serve as technical advisors. The technology, based on the ISO 18000-7 standard, provides commercial and government users with the ability to track the whereabouts and status of a wide range of everyday objects, including vehicles, shipping containers, pharmaceutical products, hazardous materials, perishable goods and manufacturing and operational equipment. The DASH7 Alliance will work to ensure cross-vendor interoperability as well as to promote greater use of the ISO 18000-7 wireless data standard, which is more cost effective, more reliable, and operates at lower power levels than ZigBee and similar wireless data technologies. The DASH7 Alliance will also foster new wireless data innovations based on the standard, including advanced sensor networking, electronic seals, mobile phone integration, and other advances enabled through upcoming DASH7 developer resources available at http://www.dash7.org/. “The DASH7 Alliance is an important next step for the wireless industry as DASH7-ready products become more ubiquitous,” said David Stephens, CEO of Savi Technology. “By assembling this coalition of both end users and technology companies, we can promote greater interoperability and reliability, but also inspire greater innovation around a common standard.” “As United States companies grow RFID technologies from their infancy into an industry, it is incredibly important to set a common standard for how all of these new applications are going to be designed and built,” said Dr. James Shuler, Manager of the United States Department of Energy’s Packaging Certification Program.Commenting on the U.S. Department of Defense’s move to an RFID III multi-vendor contract earlier this year, Lt. Col. Pat Burden, the DoD’s Product Manager Joint-Automatic Identification Technology, stated, “This is a significant milestone for DoD in that this migration will not only give DoD and other Federal agencies’ customers best-value solutions at competitive prices, but it moves us to ISO 18000-7:2008 compliant products, thus broadening interoperability with DoD and our coalition partners.” “In ABI’s opinion, the DASH7 Alliance is both timely and mission critical to growing the active UHF segment of the RFID market,” Michael Liard, Practice Director, RFID, of ABI Research, said in a just-released report entitled, “Introducing the DASH7 Alliance: Bringing Balance and Vision to Active RFID Markets.” “The DASH7 Alliance will bring stakeholders together to share and discuss ISO 18000-7 technical issues such as advancing the standard on a global scale, identify and eliminate potential gray areas, and share information about wins and pitfalls,” the ABI report stated. “The Alliance will also work to build applications on top of the core standard, including electronic seals, RTLS, sensing and monitoring, long distance communication, and more.” Semiconductor manufacturers STMicroelectronics and Analog Devices plan to provide hardware developer toolkits that enable product innovations and enhance interoperability, and Texas Instruments also plans to be a DASH7 participant. The United States Department of Energy and three of its national laboratories, as well as the University of Pittsburgh, will provide technical advisory services for appropriate consultation and input, within their areas of expertise. The University of Pittsburgh also plans to serve as the initial test and certification lab for DASH7-enabled products. After successfully completing DASH7 test and certification, alliance members will be able to deploy the “DASH7 Certified” logo on their products to demonstrate reliability and interoperability to prospective end users. About the DASH7 Alliance The DASH7 Alliance is a coalition of organizations from multiple industries that are committed to collaborating on the promotion of wireless data technologies based on the ISO 18000-7 standard. Organizations initially planning to participate include Analog Devices, Dow, Evigia Systems, Hi-G-Tek, IDENTEC SOLUTIONS, KPC, Inc., Lockheed Martin, Michelin, Northrop Grumman, RFind, Savi Technology, STMicroelectronics, Texas Instruments, and Unisys Corporation. The U.S. Department of Energy and three of its laboratories, the Argonne National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, as well as the University of Pittsburgh, plan to serve as technical advisors.

India’s Fighter Aircraft Of Russian Origin - Modernization

India’s Fighter Aircraft Of Russian Origin - Modernization 
(NSI News Source Info) New Delhi, India - March 18, 2009: India’s updated MiG-21 ‘Bisons’ before, and noted the trouble they have caused American opponents at COPE India 2004 & 2005. Deliveries on that $600+ million program continue; meanwhile the delivery date for the winning aircraft in India’s forthcoming light-medium fighter tender remains up in the air, and India’s indigenous Light Combat Aircraft (Tejas) program has been beset by numerous problems and ongoing delays. By 2010, the IAF will have phased out most of its 300-or-so MiG-21s, the 16-18 aircraft in its only remaining swing-wing MiG-23 ground attack squadron, around 100-110 related swing-wing MiG-27M Bahadur ground attack fighters that are not being upgraded, and the MiG-25 Foxbat strategic reconnaissance jets (already phased out). 125 MiG-21 Bis interceptors and 40 upgraded MiG-27ML fighters will remain. As the timelines for replacements stretch, India’s defense planners are concluding that more upgrades will be necessary in order to keep their existing fleet viable. February 2006 reports discussed a decision to upgrade India’s existing fleet of MiG-29B, MiG-29S, and two-seat MiG-29UB “Baaz” (Falcon) aircraft as well, in order to give them multi-role capabilities and improve their ability to carry advanced weapons. December 2006 reports from MosNews et. al. indicated that a contract has been signed, but it wasn’t until March 2008 that a deal was finalized. Now, India is reacting to Russia’s grounding of its own MiG-29 fleet, following some catastrophic accidents involving the fighter’s tail fins… Wanting a New Baaz: The Upgrades A Better Baaz: Program Updates India was the first international customer of the MiG-29. The Indian Air Force (IAF) placed an order for more than 50 MiG-29s in 1980 while the aircraft was still in its initial development phase. Since its induction into the IAF in 1985, the aircraft has undergone a series of modifications with the addition of new avionics, sub-systems, turbofan engines and radars. The upgraded Indian version is known as Baaz (Hindi for Hawk) and forms a crucial component of the second-line offensive aircraft-fleet of the IAF after the Sukhoi Su-30MKI. The MiG-29’s good operational record prompted India to sign a deal with Russia in 2005/06 to upgrade its 67 MiG-29s for US$888 million. Under the deal, Russia replaced the old N019 radar with the Phazatron Zhuk-M radar. Russia also gave India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Limited the license to manufacture 120 RD-33 series 3 turbojet engines for the upgrade. The MiG-29s were also upgraded for mid-air refueling to increase their endurance. In 2008, the IAF awarded the MiG Corporation another US$900 million contract to upgrade all of its 69 operational MiG-29s. The upgrade will include a new weapon control system, avionics, cockpit ergonomics, air-to-air missiles, high-accuracy air-to-ground missiles and "smart" aerial bombs. The upgraded MiG-29s will also have an enhanced beyond-visual-range combat ability. The first six MiG-29s will be upgraded in Russia while the remaining 63 MiGs will be upgraded at the Hindustan Aeronautics facility in India. India also awarded a multi-million dollar contract to Israel Aircraft Industries to provide avionics and sub-systems for the upgrade. In January 2004, the Indian Navy signed a contract for the delivery of 12 MiG-29K and 4 MiG-29KUB which will be operated from INS Vikramaditya. The first MiG-29KUB manufactured for the Navy took to the skies in May 2008. The first four aircraft were delivered to India in February 2009. There were also reports that the Indian Navy would purchase an additional 30 MiG-29Ks and -KUBs for the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier. The Indian Air Force expressed concern after 90 MiG-29s were grounded in Russia. After carrying out an extensive inspection, the IAF cleared all MiG-29s in its fleet. IANS reported in December 2006 that India was “finalizing” a proposal to have its fleet of MiG-29 lightweight fighters refurbished for $888 million by the Russian company RSK-MiG, which has a dedicated upgrade set designed to turn older MiG-29 air defense fighters into multi-role MiG-29SMT/UBT fighters. India’s focus on its domestic industries will ensure that its modifications will include their share of unique attributes and equipment, in addition to the standard set. The upgraded MiG-29s are expected to remain in service for 10-15 years after being fitted with upgraded weapons and a new avionics suite, including the Phazatron Zhuk-M radar. Phazotron’s Zhuk-M is a derivative of the baseline Zhuk radar, but its acquisition range has increased 1.5 times, with a wide scan and tracking area of + / – 85 deg. in azimuth and + / – 60 deg. in elevation, terrain following mode, and ground target acquisition including high-resolution modes. Normally, these moves would accompany weapons upgrades. India’s MiG-29s are already believed to be capable of firing the R-77/AA-12 “AMRAAMski” medium range air-air missile, but photos consistently show the R-27/ AA-10. The new systems will offer certain R-77 compatibility, along with the ability to mount precision air-to-ground weapons. Upgraded electronic warfare systems round out the package, to improve survivability against modern threats. In terms of aerodynamic performance, India’s MiG-29s will be upgraded with extra fuel tanks in a thickened center spine, but the MiG-29SMT upgrades will continue to suffer from “Soviet short-legs syndrome.” Adding mid-air refueling capability completes the upgrade, offering dramatic changes to their deployment range. Unspecified engine modifications may also correct some of the problems experienced with the R-33 engine, such as the visible smoke trails that have already been addressed in the MiG-29M2. This will not quite bring the older MiG-29s up to the status of the MiG-29M2 multi-role aircraft, let alone the thrust-vectoring MiG-29OVT/MiG-35 model that Russia is reportedly offering for India’s light-medium fighter competition. Nevertheless, India will be left with an aircraft that is comparable to the F-16C as a strike fighter, with overall air-to-air performance that is arguably superior to all but the F-16 Block 60s with their ultra-advanced AESA radar. Indian MiG-27M MiG-27L. This was an export variant of the MiG-27M provided in 1986 to India in knock-down kits for license-assembly. Same as MiG-27M except the undernose fairing for the infra-red search and track (IRST) sensor has a single window instead of several like the one on the original MiG-27M. A total of 130 were assembled by India. MiG-27H. This was a 1988 indigenous Indian upgrade of its license-assembled MiG-27L with French avionics, which provides the same level of performance but with much reduced size and weight. The space saved is used to house the French Agave radar. At least 120 were converted from MiG-27Ls. Reports indicate that RSK-MiG will be the sole vendor to perform the upgrades and service life extension tasks, but there have also been reports that components would come from a range of Indian, Russian, French, Israeli (Elbit has its own MiG-29 ‘Sniper’ upgrade program), and possibly even American vendors. The Americans would represent a new source, but the others all contributed to the MiG-21 Bis upgrade, and the $130+ million MiG-27ML upgrade sources equipment from Russia, Israel, and Britain (Vinten optical pod), and may include other countries as well.

Israel May Use New Jericho III Ballistic Missiles Against Iran

Israel May Use New Jericho III Ballistic Missiles Against Iran
(NSI News Source Info) JERUSALEM - March 18, 2009: Ballistic missiles could be Israel’s weapon of choice against Iranian nuclear facilities if it decides on a pre-emptive attack and deems air strikes too risky, according to a report by a Washington think-tank. Israel is widely assumed to have Jericho missiles capable of hitting Iran with an accuracy of a few dozen metres (yards) from target. Such a capability would be free of warplanes’ main drawbacks — limits on fuel and ordnance, and perils to pilots. Extrapolating from analyst assessments that the most advanced Jerichos carry 750 kg (1,650 lb) conventional warheads, Abdullah Toukan of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said 42 missiles would be enough to “severely damage or demolish” Iran’s core nuclear sites at Natanz, Esfahan and Arak. “If the Jericho III is fully developed and its accuracy is quite high then this scenario could look much more feasible than using combat aircraft,” he said in the March 14 report, titled “Study on a Possible Israeli Strike on Iran’s Nuclear Development Facilities”. Israel, whose jets bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981 and mounted a similar sortie over Syria in 2007, has hinted that it could forcibly deny Iran the means to make an atomic bomb. But many experts believe the Iranian sites are too distant, dispersed and fortified for Israel’s warplanes to take on alone. Israel neither confirms nor denies having Jerichos, as part of an “ambiguity” policy veiling its own assumed atomic arsenal. A veteran Israeli defence consultant played down the idea of ballistic missiles being used for conventional attacks. “You look at any major Western military, and you’ll see that such strikes are the purview of manned warplanes, while ballistic missiles are reserved for nuclear-strike scenarios,” the consultant told Reuters on condition of anonymity. I’m still curious as to why they are waiting. There has to be a moment in which Israel can do nothing more than take military action. Makes me wonder about what is going on behind the scenes in the intelligence community. Are they waiting to see if some covert sabotage works out? I think this whole situation is too complex for any civilian to truly understand. They’re probably taking every measure possible until the point of no return, not to mention their preparation for a likely retaliation from several fronts. Imagine having to prepare this kind of operation, not to mention preparing your own defence forces for what’s likely to come in the aftermath. Scary stuff. Here’s more on the Jericho III It is estimated that the Jericho III entered service by 2008. The Jericho III is believed to have a three-stage solid propellant and a payload of 1,000 to 1,300 kg. It is possible for the missile to be equipped with a single 750 kg nuclear warhead or two or three low yield MIRV warheads. It has an estimated launch weight of 29,000 kg and a length of 15.5 m with a width of 1.56 m. It likely is similar to an upgraded Shavitspace launch vehicle. It will probably have longer first and second-stage motors. It is estimated that it will have a range of 4,800 to 7,000 km (2,982 to 4,350 miles), and probably significantly greater with a payload of 350kg (one Israeli nuclear warhead). It is believed that the Jericho 3 is inertial guided with a radar guided warhead and silo-based with mobile vehicle and railcar capabilities. The Jericho 3 will give Israel nuclear strike capabilities within the entire Middle East and Europe. The range of the Jericho 3 also provides an extremely high impact speed for nearby targets, enabling it to avoid any ballistic missile defenses that may develop in the immediate region. On 17 January 2008 Israel test fired a multi-stage ballistic missile believed to be of the Jericho III type reportedly capable of carrying “Special warheads”.

North Korea Demands U.S. Stop Humanitarian Aid Supplies

North Korea Demands U.S. Stop Humanitarian Aid Supplies
(NSI News Source Info) WASHINGTON - March 18, 2009: A U.S. State Department spokesman said Tuesday that the United States would stop humanitarian aid supplies to North Korea after the communist state requested Washington discontinue the program. Robert Wood said the U.S. had received an official request from North Korea several days ago. The notification contained no reasons for the rejection of the aid. "Clearly, this is food assistance that the North Korean people need. That's why we're concerned," he said. He added that the State Department would continue to cooperate with NGOs working in North Korea to make sure that earlier delivered humanitarian aid had reached those in need of it. Wood also said that in 2008 and 2009, the U.S. had supplied 169,000 metric tons of humanitarian aid to North Korea, with the last batch of 5,000 tons dispatched in late January. The North Korean decision comes amid rising tensions on the Korean Peninsula. Pyongyang has called U.S.-South Korean military exercises preparation for war, and has also said that any attempt to shoot down what it calls a telecommunications satellite next month will also lead to armed conflict. Seoul and Washington say the real purpose of the launch is to test a long-range Taepodong-2 missile, which is thought to have a range of 6,700 kilometers (4,100 miles) and could possibly reach Alaska. 009:

Russia Launches Carrier Rocket Bearing European GOCE Satellite

Russia Launches Carrier Rocket Bearing European GOCE Satellite
(NSI News Source Info) MOSCOW - March 18, 2009: Russia has successfully launched a Rockot carrier rocket bearing Europe's first GOCE satellite. The Rockot was launched by Russia's Space Forces from the Plesetsk space center in northwest Russia at 5.21 p.m. Moscow time (14.21 GMT). The Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) satellite is designed to measure the Earth's gravitational field. GOCE, developed by the European Space Agency (ESA), is the first European satellite designed to provide unique models of the Earth's gravity on a global scale, and with unprecedented accuracy and spatial resolution. The Rockot launch vehicle is a modified version of the Russian RS-18 (SS-19 Stiletto) intercontinental ballistic missile. It uses the two original lower stages of the ICBM, in conjunction with a Breeze-KM upper-stage for commercial payloads. The contract to launch GOCE was concluded between the ESA and Eurockot Launch Services GmbH, a joint venture of the Khrunichev center (49%) and EADS Astrium (51%).

CSTO Rapid-Reaction Force To Hold Exercises In Kazakhstan In Fall

CSTO Rapid-Reaction Force To Hold Exercises In Kazakhstan In Fall
(NSI News Source Info) MOSCOW - March 18, 2009: The joint rapid-reaction forces of a post-Soviet regional security bloc will hold military exercises in September in Kazakhstan, the Russian defense minister said on Tuesday. The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which comprises Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, agreed in early February to set up the rapid-reaction force. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said later on Tuesday that the force should be well-organized and equipped to counter a variety of threats. "These are units that we should be able to rely on in dealing with the most difficult problems, including terrorist and military threats," he said. The Russian president also said the CSTO was open for cooperation with the United States in the fight against terrorism in Central Asia. The rapid-reaction force, which Medvedev has said "will be just as good as comparable NATO forces," will be used to repulse military aggression, conduct anti-terrorist operations, fight transnational crime and drug trafficking, and neutralize the effects of natural disasters. Moscow has stressed that collective forces will not interfere in the domestic conflicts of the bloc's member countries.

Russia To Begin Large-Scale Rearmament Of Armed Forces In 2011

Russia To Begin Large-Scale Rearmament Of Armed Forces In 2011
(NSI News Source Info) MOSCOW - March 18, 2009: A comprehensive rearmament of Russia's Armed Forces will begin in 2011, President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday. "Last year we equipped a number of military units with new weaponry, and we will start large-scale rearmament of the Armed Forces in 2011," Medvedev said at a meeting with Defense Ministry officials. He said that the current military-political situation in the world calls for a thorough modernization of the Russian Armed Forces, primarily its strategic nuclear forces. "They must be able to accomplish all tasks aimed at ensuring Russia's military security," Medvedev said, adding that this process would involve the enhancement of combat readiness of all military units. The president reiterated that "despite the current financial difficulties, Russia has never had better favorable conditions to create modern and highly efficient armed forces." Medvedev also said that the Russian Security Council would soon endorse a national security strategy for the period up to 2020. "Long-term plans in the defense sphere should be based on a Russian national security strategy for the period up to 2020, which the Security Council should endorse in the near future," Medvedev said. The president announced last year that Russia would make the modernization of its nuclear deterrent and Armed Forces a priority in light of the August military conflict with Georgia. Russia's military expenditure has been steadily growing recently, and the country reportedly plans to increase the current defense budget of $40 billion by 50% in the next three years. Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said on Tuesday that the share of modern weaponry in the Russian Armed Forces would reach 30% by 2015, and would total 70% by 2020.

Boeing Unveils New International F-15 Configuration -- the F-15SE

Boeing Unveils New International F-15 Configuration -- the F-15SE
(NSI News Source Info) ST. LOUIS - March 18, 2009: The Boeing Company today in St. Louis unveiled the F-15 Silent Eagle (F-15SE), a new F-15 configuration designed to meet the future needs of international customers. "The F-15 Silent Eagle is designed to meet our international customers' anticipated need for cost-effective stealth technologies, as well as for large and diverse weapons payloads," said Mark Bass, F-15 Program vice president for Boeing. "The innovative Silent Eagle is a balanced, affordable approach designed to meet future survivability needs." ST. LOUIS, March 17, 2009 -- Boeing unveiled the F-15 Silent Eagle on March 17 in St. Louis. The F-15SE is a new F-15 configuration designed to meet the future needs of international customers. Improvements in stealth include coatings and treatments on the aircraft. With the added advantage of redesigned conformal fuel tanks (CFTs) that allow for internal weapons carriage, the Silent Eagle becomes a very attractive fighter for Boeing's international customers. Depending on the specific mission, the customer can use the CFTs that are designed for internal carriage or change back to the traditional CFTs for optimum fuel capacity and external weapons carriage. The Silent Eagle will be able to internally carry air-to-air missiles such as the AIM-9 and AIM-120 and air-to-ground weapons such as the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) and Small Diameter Bomb (SDB). The standard weapons load used on current versions of the F-15 is available with the traditional CFTs installed. The aircraft's canted vertical tails improve aerodynamic efficiency, provide lift, and reduce airframe weight. Another aerodynamic improvement is the Digital Flight Control System, which improves the aircraft's reliability and reduces airframe weight. Survivability improvements include a BAES Digital Electronic Warfare System (DEWS) working in concert with the Raytheon Advanced Electronic Scanning Array (AESA) radar. Boeing has completed a conceptual prototype of the CFT internal-carriage concept, and plans to flight-test a prototype by the first quarter of 2010, including a live missile launch. The design, development, and test of this internal carriage system are available as a collaborative project with an international aerospace partner.

Boeing completed AMP On Third C-130 Ahead Of Schedule / 3rd Boeing C-130 AMP Aircraft Flies Ahead Of Schedule

Boeing completed AMP On Third C-130 Ahead Of Schedule / 3rd Boeing C-130 AMP Aircraft Flies Ahead Of Schedule
(NSI News Source Info) SAN ANTONIO - March 18, 2009: The Boeing Company successfully completed the first test flight of the U.S. Air Force's third C-130 Avionics Modernization Program (AMP) aircraft on Jan. 17, three weeks ahead of schedule. The flight marked another milestone for the most comprehensive C-130 avionics modification ever conducted. SAN ANTONIO, March 16, 2009 -- The third C-130 Avionics Modernization Program aircraft flew for the first time on Jan. 17, three weeks ahead of schedule. Boeing test pilot Mike Leone and crew conducted the two-hour flight from the company's San Antonio facility. AMP gives the warfighter more situational awareness with a head-up display and six full-color display screens. The H3 aircraft accomplished both functional check flight and acceptance check flight tests. Boeing test pilot Mike Leone conducted the two-hour flight from the Boeing facility in San Antonio. "The joint effort between Boeing and our Air Force customer continues to enable the C-130 program to reach critical milestones ahead of schedule and under cost," said Mark Angelo, Boeing C-130 AMP program manager. "We are proud to continue to provide the Air Force with a modern tactical airlift platform." Boeing completed the major modification and upgrade package on H3 about 13 percent faster than the upgrade to H2.5. H3 will soon join aircraft H2 and H2.5 in the flight test program, which is 81 percent complete. The Air Force and Boeing signed a contract on Sept. 30 for the first two Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) AMP kits. Boeing plans to provide a total of 26 kits, engineering services, training and logistics support during LRIP. The company will also install production kits on 11 of the C-130 aircraft.

U.S. Air Force Accepts First Delivery Of Raytheon Miniature Air Launched Decoy

U.S. Air Force Accepts First Delivery Of Raytheon Miniature Air Launched Decoy
(NSI News Source Info) TUCSON, Ariz. - March 18, 2009: The U.S. Air Force accepted delivery of Raytheon Company's first Miniature Air Launched Decoy low rate initial production unit. "The warfighter now has an incredible new capability thanks to the hard work of hundreds of Raytheon employees, suppliers, dedicated Air Force civil servants, uniformed service members and support personnel," said Ken Watson, the U.S. Air Force's MALD™ program manager. "MALD will work in concert with other electronic warfare assets as part of a system of systems to shape the electronic warfare battlespace and ensure our aviators and their coalition partners return home safely to their loved ones." MALD protects aircrews and their aircraft by duplicating the combat flight profiles and signatures of U.S. and allied aircraft. MALD is a state-of-the-art, low-cost flight vehicle that is modular, air-launched and programmable. It weighs less than 300 pounds and has a range of approximately 500 nautical miles (about 575 statute miles). "With this first delivery under our belts, Raytheon is on track to meet the U.S. Air Force's required asset availability date of March 2010," said Harry Schulte, Raytheon Missile Systems vice president of Air Warfare Systems. "We're committed to on-time delivery, since the warfighter is counting on us to provide them with the flexibility and capability inherent in MALD." Raytheon Company, with 2008 sales of $23.2 billion, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, homeland security and other government markets throughout the world. With a history of innovation spanning 87 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration and other capabilities in the areas of sensing; effects; and command, control, communications and intelligence systems, as well as a broad range of mission support services. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 73,000 people worldwide.