Russia And China Signed Intellectual Property (IP) Rights Agreement

Russia And China Signed Intellectual Property (IP) Rights Agreement

(NSI News Source Info) December 22, 2008: On December 11th, Russia and China signed an agreement, in which China promised to stop stealing Russian military technology. It appears that the main function of the new "military technical cooperation" agreement is to stop China from exporting their copies of Russian equipment, and competing with the Russian originals. For the last five years, the Russian government has been trying to deal with the growing problem Russian defense manufacturers have had with China tolerating, or even encouraging, Chinese manufacturers to steal Russian military technology. It's not entire weapons systems the Chinese are stealing (like aircraft or ships), but components. Radars and electronic systems in particular were being copied, often using samples and technical data provided by Russian manufacturers, in anticipation of a sale. What often happened was that there was no sale, and then, a few years later, the Chinese came out with a copy, often a blatant copy, of the Russian radar, missile or electronic warfare gear.

The Chinese have produced several copies of Russian artillery systems (like the 2S19M1 self-propelled 155mm gun or several multiple rocket launcher systems.) The Chinese used their status as a major buyer of Russian aircraft and warships to deflect demands that the copying cease. The Russians feared that the Chinese would copy major systems, like aircraft or ships, and continue to ignore Russian demands that their intellectual property rights be respected. This is ironic for the Russians. During the Cold War, much Western military and civilian technology was blatantly copied, including microprocessors and computers themselves, by the Russians.

Since the end of the Cold War, Russia has been more careful about this, because the collapse of the Soviet Union opened up the Russian defense labs, and their large store of discoveries that had not been developed into anything useful yet. American manufacturers were eager to get rights to this technology, once they got a good look at it. The Western firms paid, and the billions of dollars that entered the Russian economy that way forced the Russians to reciprocate, and pay for Western technology they wanted. The Chinese have been forced by the West to cut back on some of their blatant theft of foreign technology, except for Russian military stuff. The Russians were getting fed up, and the government was under growing pressure to crack down on the Chinese theft. Russia, flush with oil revenues and a booming economy, was not as desperate for Chinese arms business as they used to be. So for the last year, Chinese purchases of Russian military equipment have declined, as the Chinese were increasingly offering stolen Russian technology for export sales. Finally, Russia threatened legal action on an international scale. Thus the new agreement was a Chinese effort to avoid that sort of legal entanglement.

Israel And Hamas Cease-Fire Not Extended

Israel And Hamas Cease-Fire Not Extended (NSI News Source Info) December 21, 2008: The end of a six-month cease-fire between Hamas and Israel could hamper the long-term peace process in the region. As if the threat of a nuclear Iran and the challenge of rising violence in Afghanistan weren't cause enough for concern, Barack Obama's incoming administration was dealt the news Thursday that Hamas doesn't intend to renew its expiring cease-fire with Israel. The end of the six-month cease-fire, coming only a month before President-elect Obama takes office, could complicate his administration's efforts in the peace process between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The cease-fire, which has been broken sporadically, was negotiated with the help of the Egyptians. It was set to expire Friday, but escalating violence along the border in recent weeks -- including a barrage of rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip over the past few days -- signaled the agreement likely would not be extended. Israeli Army officers ran past a pair of tanks maneuvering at their forward base on the border with Gaza near Kibbutz Nahal Oz in southern Israel. A six-month cease-fire between Israel and the militant Islamist organization Hamas expired this morning, with senior Israeli government officials warning that a military offensive in Gaza would be unavoidable if the rocket fire from the territory continued

A demonstrator jumped into the air to avoid a tear gas canister fired by Israeli soldiers during a demonstration against Israel's separation barrier in the West Bank village of Bilin, near Ramallah. Israel says the barrier is necessary for security; Palestinians call it a land grab

A Palestinian boy wearing an Islamic Jihad headband beside a Palestinian militant during an anti-Israel rally in Gaza. Armed Islamist factions in Gaza put their men on alert on Friday, but calm prevailed

Jet Fighter Aircraft Competitions Could Make or Break Contractors

Jet Fighter Aircraft Competitions Could Make or Break Contractors (NSI News Source Info) December 21, 2008: Within a couple of years, some aerospace companies and industries might be eliminated from fighter markets where they have competed for decades, facing, at best, a hard and uncertain road back into the business. All eyes are on Norway, the Netherlands and Denmark, seeking a replacement for their F-16s. Norway needs 48 new aircraft, the Netherlands nominally 85, Denmark 24. Norway is moving toward a decision as early as this month. The Netherlands is expected to decide early in 2009, Denmark later in the year. It’s remarkable that these nations are holding competitions at all. The F-16 program forged industrial and military bonds with the U.S. Air Force and Lockheed Martin, and all three countries were early partners in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). JSF is driving the timing of these decisions. If this was an off-the-shelf purchase, the customers would not have to make a decision yet, since none is looking at initial operating capability (IOC) before 2016. But Lockheed Martin says it needs to ramp up production now to hit cost targets and wants to bind its partners into an early, large and contractually enforceable joint commitments to their 2012-16 buys. Before 2007, there seemed little doubt that Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands would lead the way into such a deal. Ironically, it was Eurofighter that started to change the picture in Norway, lobbying aggressively for an open competition, before pulling out of Norway and Denmark early this year. But Sweden has taken the offensive: The Gripen Next Generation (NG), a paper concept in 2006, is now a fully funded program, including a flying prototype and major ground demonstrations, backed up by a Swedish government undertaking to buy the aircraft if export customers commit. Saab regards all the competitions as real—even in the Netherlands, regarded as the toughest nut to crack—and has offered an industrial participation (IP) program that Norway’s industry nominated as its favorite. IP is one of the “wedge issues” in the Netherlands/Norway/Denmark theater. In 2007, a weak dollar started to make local industries wonder how they could hope to win and maintain high-tech shares in the JSF program. Saab offered a fixed share, not just a chance to compete. Saab has also been pushing the Gripen’s fuel economy—it’s half JSF’s size—and low maintenance costs, which are largely known since it combines a modified airframe with a proven engine. The influence of U.S. politics and progress with the JSF program will be important, perhaps decisive. So far, the schedule slippages in the JSF program have not reached the point where they imperil export IOC dates, but neither has their cost impact been fully gauged. The schedule between now and mid-2012—when the U.S. Marines are supposed to hit IOC—is tight. The Air Force and U.S. Navy both face funding crunches. Lockheed Martin wanted to close a bulk-buy deal long before a new administration arrived in town, but this turned out to be impossible.

(JAS 39D Gripen takes off from Emmen air base in Switzerland, armed with Amraam and IRIS-T missiles.)

Whether all this will be enough for Gripen to win is an open question. Pro-JSF preference in the Netherlands is entrenched, and the U.S. has permitted Lockheed Martin to offer low fixed prices to secure its first batch of export orders. (The Pentagon itself, by law, cannot order a multiyear production batch until operational testing is completed.) While the JSF’s ability to carry four internal advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles was barely mentioned a year ago, project officials are now talking about (unproven) six- or eight-missile loadouts. But Gripen has maneuvered JSF into a “must-win” scenario. The program could tolerate a loss in Norway or Denmark, but to lose both—or, horrors, a Dutch defection—would be a shock that would encourage opponents in Australia and elsewhere. And Saab can lose and still win. Even if the JSF prevails, the Gripen will be the aircraft that placed second and posed the most serious competition to the big guns of the U.S. team, in three nations with respected, professional air forces. The Gripen team will continue to support the NG until several other contests are decided. Among these are Switzerland and Brazil. The former has downselected to Gripen, Rafale and Typhoon; the latter to Gripen, Rafale and the F/A-18 Super Hornet. Switzerland has evaluated all three aircraft in-country and expects to make a decision in the third quarter of 2009. Other than India, they are the only near-term contests where the European twins are engaged. Also, Brazil included the Super Hornet in its downselect, while the fighter was pulled out of Switzerland—even though it is a current Hornet operator, and Boeing’s only Super Hornet export so far was based on the ease and low cost of transition from the “classic” to the new aircraft. The Swiss air force has placed a priority on short takeoff and landing, maneuverability and good performance in the intercept role; all three contenders are better at high Mach than the Super Hornet. Brazil showed some interest in the Sukhoi Su-35, but eliminated it (according to Russian sources, because Russian industry could not compete on IP), and is showing political balance: its choices are the Rafale, which is free of U.S. content, Gripen—with a lot of important parts from the U.S.—and the all-U.S. Super Hornet. All, however, have potentially powerful offset programs, and there is a possibility that a Rafale order could be linked to the transfer of French nuclear submarine technology. After Switzerland and Brazil are decided, the Rafale is down to India. Typhoon is in play there, with longer-shot prospects in Korea and Japan. So far, however, the market seems to be taking its cues from the fighters’ sponsors in the U.K., Italy and France and their tepid support for both programs. The advantage in that respect belongs to Rafale, which has not been hampered by endless negotiations over every production batch of aircraft, and should benefit from a French government decision next year to buy 60 more aircraft and integrate active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. Both European twins suffer from high price tags, being more expensive than the projected price of JSF and more costly than the Super Hornet. And although fighters are Dassault’s heritage, it’s easy to forget that the company’s main business is selling corporate jets. The company has no incentive to give the Rafale away. Boeing, as a competitor in Brazil, is working to eke out the Super Hornet line, which is supposed to close in 2014 as the Navy ends production in favor of the F-35C. But Boeing has taken advantage of a stable Navy production program to turn the Super Hornet into a model of efficient production. (A Luftwaffe Typhoon taxies at Emmen during recent Swiss evaluation flights.) Within the Navy, the Super Hornet program office has been known to talk up the idea of extending orders by two or three years, which invariably means a corresponding delay in the start of F-35 production. It is an appealing idea to the black-shoe Navy—the surface fleet—since the deferred cost of introducing the F-35C in those years can be transferred into the cash-strapped shipbuilding program. It has reached the point where Congress has cut two early F-35Cs from low-rate initial production, and Pentagon leaders are warning that the move could result in a separate, later test program for the Navy. The same game is playing out in Australia, where Boeing is proposing another 24 Super Hornets—or even a Super Hornet/Growler mix—in the event that JSF is delayed. Results in these near-term competitions will influence future contests. If Switzerland and Brazil don’t yield a win for Rafale, Typhoon or the Super Hornet, it is hard to see why they would emerge better placed in India, for example; and in Japan and Korea—possible Typhoon targets—the question is always whether the interest is serious, or whether the Europeans are being kept in play to keep competitive pressure on the U.S. A Gripen win in either, though, would add to its strength in India, and boost its already strong position against the F-16 in the new NATO countries, where Vladimir Putin is emerging as the best marketing representative for Western fighters since the end of the Cold War. The biggest potential win is in Romania, which is looking for 48 aircraft; Croatia is looking for 12 fighters, and the Slovak Republic 14, with Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania also in prospect. Whether it was Niels Bohr or Yogi Berra who said, “Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future,” some outcomes from this complex picture seem more likely than others. Barring catastrophe in the JSF program, it will still be an upset if Gripen wins Norway or Denmark, and an earthquake if the Swedes win in Holland. That said, it seems likely that Gripen will score more successes, like Switzerland and Romania. And that means, in turn, that the Typhoon, Super Hornet and Rafale are in contention for the remaining market, which may be big enough for two, but not for three.

Russian Troops Return To Georgian Village To Prevent Violence

Russian Troops Return To Georgian Village To Prevent Violence (NSI News Source Info) MOSCOW - December 21, 2008: Russian troops have returned to Perevi village along Georgia's border with South Ossetia to prevent growing tensions in the area, the Foreign Ministry said Friday in response to criticism by EU monitors. The troops had briefly entered the southern part of the village initially to try and verify whether a checkpoint was geographically located in South Ossetia or Georgia, which was in line with the French-brokered peace deal, the ministry said. "However, the Georgian leadership staged a new provocation by sending commandos into the village in violation of the peace plan and the EU monitoring mission's mandate...The move was accompanied by an active propaganda campaign, when foreign reporters were invited." "The Russian command made a decision that Russian troops should return to the checkpoint to curb growing tensions," the ministry said. Russia reported a complete pullout from undisputed Georgian territory ahead of an agreed October 10 deadline. Russian troops have been replaced by an EU monitoring mission tasked with ensuring security along the border with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Both Abkhazia and South Ossetia have refused to allow EU observers on their territory. Russia has also retained a presence in Akhalgori, however, as Moscow insists the area is part of Abkhazia that had been occupied by Georgian troops. Russia has also kept a checkpoint in Perevi, on the border with South Ossetia. Georgian authorities said Russian military refused EU envoys, who were in Perevi on a familiarization mission, access to the village on December 13. The French ambassador said it was a "violation of the [French-brokered] agreement on the part of Russia." Russia recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states on August 26 after a five-day war with Georgia, which launched an attack on South Ossetia to try and regain control of the region. The two Georgian breakaway republics have had de facto independence since they broke away from Georgia in bloody post-Soviet conflicts in the early 1990s.

Daily Describes Activities of ISI in India

Daily Describes Activities of ISI in India

(NSI News Source Info) Article by Wilson John: "ISI Fangs" - December 21, 2008: PAKISTAN'S INTER Services Intelligence (ISI) has done what its Army can never do.

It has captured the vitals of the nation, its tentacles are spread across every nook and cranny-from Gujarat to Assam, from Kashmir to Kerala. It can trigger blasts in remote places, fuel communal riots in peaceful cities and blow up railway stations anywhere it wishes to.

It can spread terror wherever, whenever. Its control is full and final. There is not a city in the country which doesn't have either an active or a sleeper agent of the ISI.

This agent can be your friendly next door neighbour or the local tailor or a businessman. They have been brainwashed or inculcated into the fold by the ISI either by financial allurement or in the name of religion.

Whatever might be the provocation, the ISI agents are motivated enough to carry out the orders of their masters in Islamabad. The ISI has taken more than 28 years to implement its plan of action.

After the 1971 bifurcation of erstwhile Pakistan into two nations, the ISI, which works under the overall control of the Pak Army, has been working with the sole objective of avenging the defeat and balkanise India. The plan was conceived by President Ziaul-Haq and was called Operation Topac.

The objectives of Operation Topac were; a) to disintegrate India; b) to utilise the spy network to act as an instrument of sabotage; c) to exploit porous borders with Nepal and Bangladesh to set up bases and conduct operations. A close look at the ISI structure as it exists in Pakistan will reveal the extent of Islamabad's nefarious designs.

The ISI is headquartered in Islamabad and works under a Director General, a serving Lieutenant General of the Pakistan Army. There are three Deputy Director Generals-designated DDG (Political), DDG (External) and DDG (General).

The ISI is staffed mainly by personnel deputed from the police, para-military forces and some specialised units of the Army. There are over 25,000 active men on its staff. The largest wing of the ISI is the Joint Intelligence Bureau; it covers areas like political parties, anti-terrorism, VIP security, labour and students.

The bureau has specialised sections-one dealing exclusively with India, another on Communist countries and the third on Africa and West Asia. This wing is primarily responsible for appointment and posting of personnel at missions abroad. The second most important wing is the Joint Signal Intelligence Bureau which looks after the communication network of the ISI and collects Intelligence through monitoring of communications channels of neighbouring countries. A sizeable number of the staff is from the Army Signal Corps.

It has its units in Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar. It monitors, clicks photos and intercepts wireless communication. Its main activity, however, is to keep track of troop movements along the Indian border.

During the 1971 operations, it had over 200 clandestine radio stations on the war front. The third significant wing of the ISI is the Joint Counter-Intelligence Bureau which, as the name suggests, keeps a surveillance on foreign missions and the ISI personnel. The branch which deals exclusively with India is the Joint Intelligence North (JIN).

Its primary responsibility is to carry out operations in J&K and Afghanistan. It has been the main fund-raiser for J&K militants. The wing has also been providing arms and ammunition and operational guidance besides training Kashmiri youth in PoK camps.

The ISI's main target has been Jammu and Kashmir where the first seed of terrorism was planted in the early '80s. It began with indoctrination and an India-hate propaganda. There were innocuous signs of militancy on the street walls where the most timid graffiti read: "Indian Dogs Go Back". These graffiti were soon replaced by street bandhs [strikes] and protest rallies and by the beginning of '90s, active terrorism had begun to creep up the pristine valleys of Kashmir.

The ISI proactively trained frustrated youth, bribed and funded the so-called political and society leaders and subverted the law and order system in the State so much that the Indian Government had to send in the Army. The ISI had achieved first of its objectives early in the '90s.

Kashmir had become an international issue with terrorism taking a deep root in its streets and bylanes. Orchestrated propaganda within and outside the country kept the Kashmir issue alive in international for an objective which gave Pakistan a fake legitimacy of being the underdog. The plan to take over J&K was drafted in the mid-80s. The blueprint was prepared by the ISI chief in 1984 to aid and abet militancy in Kashmir. Amanullah Khan, chairman of the J&K Liberation Front, was consulted, Mohammad Rauf Khan, senior vice-president of the JKLF a terrorist outfit since banned, was sent to the valley in 1978-88 to mobilise youth to join ISI camps across the Line of Control of arms training. Over 20,000 persons infiltrated into Pakistan.

After pushing in militants, initially under the banner of JKLF, ISI floated several organisations-Hizb-ul-Maujahideen, Hizb-ul-Islam, Allah Tigers, Al-Umar Mujahideen, Muslim Mujahideen, Harkat Ul Ansar and Jamaat Hurriyat Conference. Besides funding, the ISI supplied both assault rifles and other sophisticated arms to the militants which included Draganov sniper rifles, anti-aircraft missiles and remote explosives. It also flooded the Valley with Improvised Explosive Devices which, till this date, continue to take a heavy till on security forces deployed for counter-insurgency operations.

The ISI has been concentrating on Punjab, especially after Bhindaranwale inspired terrorism was quashed by KPS Gill and his band of supercops. Since then, the ISI has been promoting various terrorist groups like the International Sikh Youth Federation led by Lakhbir Singh Rode, Khalistan Commando Force, Babbar Khalsa International and Khalistan Liberation Force of Pritam Singh Sekhon.

The ISI has been working in the North-East and Southern parts of India. Its links with North-East insurgents are well documented. It has not only been funding some out of the militant outfits but also been providing them with arms and ammunition and training facilities in neighbouring Nepal. The ISI's hand in the Mumbai and Coimbatore blasts has proved that it has been working quietly in spreading a terror network all over India. So while our soldier are fighting the enemy. Its agents are moving around freely, setting up bombs and creating communal rifts with impunity.

Has ISI's Operation Topac succeeded? This is a question which every citizen of this free democracy should be asking today. [Description of source: The Pioneer--Independent daily with a reputation for strong coverage of domestic issues and thoughtful editorial positions; owned by the Thapar Group]

Russia Continues To Test Bulava SLBMs

Russia Continues To Test Bulava SLBMs (NSI News Source Info) December 21, 2008: Despite several successful tests in the last two years, and the decision to put its new Bulava SLBMs (Sea Launched Ballistic Missiles) into production, Russia just announced that several more tests would be performed before the missile was actually put into service. Despite the many test failures, the Russians were confident in the basic technology in the Bulava. They knew there would be test failures, and believed they were facing no more problems that the two most recent U.S. SLBMs. These had had a 13 percent (23 tests of the Trident I) and two percent (49 tests of Trident II) failure rate. What did make many Russians nervous was the fact that the Bulava is replacement for an earlier SLBM that had to be cancelled during development because of too many test failures, and too many design and equipment problems that could not be fixed. Thus the Bulava is basically a navalized version of the successful Topol land based ICBM. The reliability of the Topol is the primary reason the Russians moved forward with Bulava. The Bulava will equip the new Borei class SSBN (nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine). The first one is about ready to enter service. The Borei class boats would replace the aging Cold War era SSBNs, which are being retired because of safety and reliability issues and the high expense of running them. Nuclear submarines are one area of military spending that did not get cut back sharply after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. The 45 ton Bulava SLBM is a little shorter than the Topol M, so that it could fit into the missile tube on the sub. Thus Bulava has a shorter range of some 8,000 kilometers. Bulava has three stages and uses solid fuel. Currently, each Bulava is being configured to carry ten 150 kiloton warheads. The warhead is also shielded to provide protection from the electronic pulse of nearby nuclear explosions. The Bulava could also carry one 500 kiloton nuclear warhead, plus decoys. Many Russians are obsessed with trying to defeat American anti-missile systems. Russian doubts about Bulava are consistent with long time problems with their submarine launched ballistic missiles. These problems were largely kept secret during the Cold War, but since then, more information has emerged. Apparently the Russians want to increase the reliability of the Bulava before they make lots of them for arming the new Borei boats. This may delay deployment of the first Borei boat by a year or more.

Iran Sends Warship To Gulf Of Aden

Iran Sends Warship To Gulf Of Aden

(NSI News Source Info) December 21, 2008: Iran has sent a warship on a patrol mission to the Gulf of Aden amid continued reports of ship hijacking by Somali pirates in the region.

According to a report by Fars News Agency, the Iranian warship arrived in the Gulf of Aden after traveling some 4,000 maritime miles and carried out a naval exercise in preparation for a potential clash with the pirates.

The Iranian ship is to join vessels from the US, Denmark, Russia, Italy and other countries to create a security corridor in the pirate-infested waters.

The deployment comes after Somali pirates hijacked the Hong Kong-flagged cargo ship, Delight, operated by the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) in the Gulf of Aden in November. The attack was the second since August 21, when Iran's Diyanat ship was boarded by about 40 pirates armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades after passing the Horn of Africa.

The Gulf of Aden, which links the Indian Ocean with the Suez Canal and the Mediterranean Sea, is the quickest route for more than 20,000 vessels going from Asia to Europe and the Americas every year.

International warships have increased cooperation to crack down on buccaneers; however, pirate raids have not abated in the Gulf of Aden. Earlier in December, a member of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Parviz Sarvari warned that Iran is mulling over a military option against Somali pirates.

Attacks by heavily-armed Somali raiders in speedboats have prompted some of the world's biggest shipping firms to switch routes from the Suez Canal and send cargo vessels around southern Africa, causing a hike in shipping costs.

Noel Choong, head of the International Maritime Bureau's Piracy Reporting Center, earlier told AP that there have been more than 100 attacks on ships off the coast of Somalia, resulting in the hijacking of more than 40 vessels so far this year. He added that 14 vessels and more than 250 crewmembers remain in the hands of pirates.

LFI/LFS THE FUTURE AIRCRAFT OF RUSSIAN AIRFORCE

LFI/LFS THE FUTURE AIRCRAFT OF RUSSIAN AIRFORCE

(NSI News Source Info) December 20, 2008: Introduction to LFI/LFS:Despite of its name - Frontal Interceptor - the LFI will have considerable ground attack capability. Many compare LFI with American JSF and this may be misleading: JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) is primarily a medium-range strike aircraft with significant air-to-air capability.

The LFI, however, is intended to be primarily a fighter with extended ground strike capability. What Russia needs is a replacement for MiG-29, which can match the famous Fulcrum not only in air-to-air performance but also in cost of production. This will not be easy. The LFI must also improve on Fulcrum's ground attack capability.

But what about LFS? Well, by upgrading its existing fleet of MiG-29s to SMT standard Russia managed to add many years to the Fulcrum's effective service life at a very low cost. However, there is a need for a small ground attack aircraft with considerable air-to-air and VSTOL capability to supplement the MiG-29SMT as well as to supplement / replace older ground attack aircraft, such as Su-25. The LFS can be safely compared with American JSF in terms of technical requirements, which were formulated by RuAF's 30th Scientific Research Institute in 1998 and presented to Russian aircraft designers.

In the future Russian air force will look something like this: long-range interceptors will include Su-35s (or several other possible variants, such as Su-30M and Su-37) and MiG-31M, which later will be replaced by MFI (either MiG 1.42 project, Sukhoi's S-37, or some new development). Russia's medium-range strike aviation will gradually shift from aging Su-24s to Su-27IBs. In tactical fighter aviation MiG-29SMT will serve for quite a few years to come and will eventually be replaced by some LFI design, perhaps based on existing Mikoyan "I-2000" design, and supplemented by LFS. Tactical strike aviation will shift from Su-25 to LFS. As to long-range strategic bombers: it's a whole different story with many unknowns.

In accordance with the conditions set by Russian Ministry of Defense, all competing LFS projects by various design bureaus must be submitted for review to the Russian Air Force during September-October of 1999. The main three competitors are: Mikoyan, Sukhoi, and Yakovlev. All three have certain advantages: Mikoyan made a lot of progress on MFI and LFI projects and is believed to have developed some new interesting technologies, Sukhoi's main advantages are its good financial standing and S-55 project, and Yakovlev bureau is an expert in designing VSTOL aircraft. The new rules of the competition, established by Russian government, will assign the two unsuccessful competitors as subcontractors in charge of particular components of the victorious LFS project. This is a cost-saving measure and co-operation between the three design firms is essential to the project's success.

At the moment it is impossible to predict which of the three design companies will win: very little information is available on the competing projects. It is known, however, that the design requirements determined by Russian Air Force include: supercruise capability ( sustained supersonic flight without afterburners), internal carriage of primary weapons, and VSTOL capability.What is known about the competing LFS designs is this: Mikoyan's early LFS design was to be powered by two 80-kN engines, possibly RD-33/RD-133. However, this had to be changed: as a cost-saving measure, Air Force requires that the aircraft is to be powered by a single Lyulka-Saturn AL-41F turbofan, which will be a common engine for the future MFI and Su-27IB aircraft. This would allow to decrease production and service costs. Sukhoi's known LFS design is the S-55 aircraft with tandem tri-plane configuration (similar to Su-35 and Su-37), powered by a single AL-41F engine with a 3D thrust-vectoring nozzle.

It is still unclear whether LFI and LFS projects will become one aircraft. The LFS designation is very general, meaning literally a light frontal aircraft. This seems to include the LFI concept. It is entirely possible that Russia will seek extended international co-operation on this project. Sukhoi already offered Poland to participate in the development / production of S-54. There is a large number of countries which in a few years will be looking to replace their aging MiG-21s, MiG-29s, Su-25s, etc. It is rather unlikely that many countries will be able to afford American JSF, so they will look for something more affordable, which also doesn't come packaged with American political demands. The LFS project is certain to attracts attention from Russia's largest arms buyers - China and India - as well as from smaller customers who are looking to improve their offensive capabilities, like Yugoslavia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, etc.Development of Russia's LFI (logkiy frontovoi istrebitel) lightweight tactical fighter has been dramatically accelerated after the Russian Air Force decided its priorities for the next 10 years.

Revealed here exclusively as the I-2000 (Istrebitel {fighter} 2000) project, the aircraft is due to become operational in 2005 as Russia's basic front-line fighter. It is also likely to become the leading export product of the Russian aircraft industry. Available information on the I-2000 indicates that it will be closely comparable to the US Joint Strike Fighter, operating in both the air-to-air and air-to-surface roles.

The aircraft comes from a long line of Mikoyan lightweight fighters, such as the MiG-15 and MiG-21. It is about the same size as the MiG-21 (shorter by 1.3m but wider by 4.5m), but noticeably smaller than its immediate predecessor, the MiG-29. Take-off weight is estimated at around 12 tonnes; maximum take-off weight at about 16 tonnes.The design requirements for I-2000 call for reduced radar and infrared visibility and very high manoeuvrability, as well as short take-off and landing. The aircraft will have a blended fuselage/centre wing and a thick wing centre-section, with curved leading and trailing edges. The unusual aerodynamic configuration and powerful thrust-vectoring engines should provide excellent agility. Take-off and landing runs are short thanks to a specially designed landing gear that permits approaches at high angles of attack.

According to official sources, single and twin-engined variants of the LFI are under consideration. The graphics show a twin-engined variant with an all-new power plant. No engines of the required thrust currently exist in Russia.The first design of a very light new-generation fighter was prepared by Mikoyan in the early 1980s, when design work also began on the heavy fighter, the MFI (sometimes known as the 1-42). The result was 'Product 33' powered by a single RD-33 engine from the MiG-29. It was of conventional design, appearing similar to the US Lockheed Martin F-16.

Although work on Product 33 became well advanced, it was not ordered due to the air force's reorientation towards multi-role aircraft - the lightweight Product 33 could be used for close air combat only. The basic Product 33 design is being offered by Mikoyan to China as the FC-1 fighter.

The only competition within Russia for the I-2000 is the S-54, developed by Sukhoi from an advanced trainer design of the early 1990s.The S-54 is essentially a smaller, single-engined Su-35, with a more conventional layout than the I-2000. The status of the S-54 is unknown, but is thought to be in the initial stages of development. Having no real Russian Air Force support, the S-54 is intended for export as a complement to the heavy Su-27 and Su-30 aircraft sold to China and India.

It has been decided that the heavy fifth-generation MFI will not enter serial production. It will, however, begin flight tests this August as a technology demonstrator. Mikhail Korzhuyev, recently appointed Mikoyan's general director, said that flights of the MFI are now a matter of honour for the company.The aircraft has been ready for flight tests for about five years, but grounded for lack of cash. An extensive upgrade programme for the MiG-29 is to continue in parallel with development work on the I-2000.

Current Status:

It was recently disclosed officially that an agreement had been signed beween the heads of the two states, India and Russia, to extend the military co-operation between the two countries. Now the previous relation of buyer and seller will no longer be true, as they will be equal partners in the development of the advanced 5th generation Light Frontline Fighter which would be a true rival to the US JSF program. A recent project in which the two countries had cooperated was the development of the PJ-10 Brahmos Supersonic Stealth cruise missile which stands practically invincible at present. India excels in the field of computers and information technology, something which Russia still lags behind in. In the PJ-10, the base was the Russian Yakhont anti-ship missile and the guidance system, onboard computer and all-the-major software were Indian. We expect the contribution of India in similar fields even in the development of the LFS. The LFS being a frontline strike fighter will also need perfect offensive strike capabilities, during night and day, smart software for an advanced fire-control system and high resolution image from the radar.

AK-47s Popular Weapon For Militants

AK-47s Popular Weapon For Militants (NSI News Source Info) December 20, 2008: Angola, whose long civil war ended six years ago, is trying to curb decades of violence by collecting and destroying weapons, especially the cheap AK-47s that have flooded the region in the last two decades. So far this year, the government has collected over 50,000 illegal weapons, many of them AK-47s. These are publicly destroyed, several thousand at a time, and reduced to scrap metal. The AK-47 has become as much of a curse for Africa as many major diseases. Not just in the places you hear about, like Somalia, Angola, Congo and Sudan, but in many others as well. Easy availability of firearms has produced a murder rate in South Africa that is, per capita, ten times what it is in the United States. In many parts of East Africa many rural tribes got access to cheap AK-47s. This has resulted in traditional crimes, like stealing cattle or land, turning into bloody war. In western Kenya alone, there have been hundreds of deaths from tribal clashes in the last two years. The violence has caused thousands of people to flee their homes, and wrecked local government in many areas. Sending in additional police and soldiers has quieted things down somewhat. But the local guys with the guns know where to hide, and the government reinforcements don't. So, eventually, the police will leave, and the AK47s will still be there. Angola has not got a lot of tribal animosity, and is paying cash for weapons, especially assault rifles and machine-guns of all types. Foreign aid organizations have adapted by hiring some of the local gunmen, to protect the relief operations from all the other gunmen. That just takes money away from more socially acceptable work. But the guns cannot be ignored. Local bad guys can steal a lot more armed with an AK-47, than in the old days when all he had was a spear or an axe. The disruptive effect of all these guns has halted, or reversed, decades of progress in treating endemic diseases. Death rates from disease and malnutrition are going up. All because of several million Cold War surplus AK-47s getting dumped in Africa. The world market for such weapons was glutted by the late 1990s. All that was left was Africa, but only if you were willing to sell cheap. The gunrunners were, and still are, although not so much in Angola, where police have cracked down on illegal arms sales. The cheap AK-47 also made it possible to use 10-14 year old children as soldiers. This was a new development, because the old weapons (spears, swords, bows) required muscle. But now, if you could lift a ten pound AK-47 and pull the trigger, you were a killer. Child soldiers changed everything, because warlords could just kidnap kids and quickly brainwash them. These armies of child killers made insurrection and anarchy more common. Tens of millions of Africans fled their homes to avoid these tiny terrors, and many of those refugees died of starvation or disease. These victims were just as dead, even if the bullets didn't get them. In fact, few AK-47 victims died from bullets. It was the massive fear, and breakdown of society, and the economy, that killed most people confronted by all these cheap AK-47s. The kids weren't very good shots, but if they got close enough to you, they were capable of unimaginable horrors. This influx of cheap AK-47s also created something of a gun culture. That has led to an increase in locally made weapons. In Nigeria, for example, there are the "Awka Guns," named after the southern city of Awka, which developed a tradition of handmade firearms in the 1960s, when it was part of the breakaway Republic of Biafra. The Biafran rebels needed weapons, and Awka, which had been a center of metal working for over a thousand years, mobilized thousands of metal workers to build crude firearms. The weapons manufacturing continued after the war, mainly to supply hunters, gangsters, and anyone needing an illegal firearm for any reason. The cheapest of these weapons is basically a single shot pistol firing a .410 (10.4mm) or 20 gauge (15.6mm) shotgun shell. This is for a young thug, or a homeowner desiring protection. Accurate enough for something within 5-10 feet. Not much good for hunting. These cost $25-$40 each. The Awka gunsmiths also make full size (or sawed off) shotguns (single or double barrel), that sell for $80-$250. These could be used for hunting. There are also handmade, 9mm revolvers for about $100. These weapons are found all over the country, but mostly in the south, and mostly among those who can't afford to pay a thousand dollars or more for a factory made weapon. On the down side, these weapons are more dangerous to use, often lacking a safety switch, and prone to exploding, rather than firing, when the trigger is pulled. Ironically, people out in the countryside, where there are still dangerous animals that a gun can protect a village from, have fewer firearms. That's because there's more money, more to steal, and more demand for weapons in the cities.

U.S. Raven Fly High In Italy

U.S. Raven Fly High In Italy

(NSI News Source Info) December 20, 2008: Italy has certified the U.S. Raven UAV (RQ-11B) for use by military and civilian operators in Italian air space. There are many civilian uses of UAVs (police, security, traffic control, search and rescue), but, worldwide, aviation authorities are reluctant to allow UAVs into the air outside of military training areas. In the U.S., FAA (Federal Aviation Authority) insists that only UAVs that can see as well as a human pilot can be used within the United States. No UAVs have this capability (as it requires mounting several more vidcams to reproduce the view from a cockpit, and more communications gear to transmit all that data). The FAA believes that the many aircraft (plus gliders and balloons) that are already in the air, without transponders, make these "enhanced" (with additional sensors) UAVs a necessity. The FAA has the final word on what is allowed to fly in the United States. For the moment, unenhanced UAVs can only fly in specific zones that have been cleared, via an FAA order, of all aircraft lacking a transponder. The FAA has cut the border patrol some slack, and allows Predator UAVs to patrol the Mexican and Canadian border. While the Predator weighs over a ton, the Raven weighs under five pounds. This is less than most birds involved in the hundreds of damaging collisions with aircraft each year in the United States. But what worries the FAA here is that 61 percent of bird collisions take place at very low altitude (under a hundred feet), and only 8 percent take place above 3,000 feet where most UAVs operate. Italy appears to regard the Raven as another bird, and less likely to collide with an aircraft, as the UAV is in view of its operator when in the air. Currently, Ravens are in the air over 300,000 hours a year for combat missions (mainly in Iraq and Afghanistan). So far, over 9,000 Ravens have been delivered or are on order. The Raven B (RQ-11A), introduced this year, weighs a little more (4.3 pounds), but has much better sensors, and the option of carrying a laser designator. Raven B flight performance is better as well. This little machine, that looks like a toy, has revolutionized battlefield intelligence and made a dramatic change in the way infantry leaders run battles. The 4.2 pound Raven A is inexpensive ($35,000 each) and can stay in the air for 80 minutes at a time. The Raven is also battery powered (and silent), and carries a color day vidcam, or a two color infrared night camera. Both cameras broadcast real time video back to the operator, who controls the Raven via a laptop computer. The Raven can go as fast as 90 kilometers an hour, but usually cruises at between 40 and 50. It can go as far as 15 kilometers from its controller, and usually flies a preprogrammed route, using GPS for navigation. The Raven is made of Kevlar, the same material used in helmets and protective vests. On average, Raven can survive about 200 landings before it breaks something. While some Ravens have been shot down, the most common cause of loss is the communications link failing (as the aircraft flies out of range, usually) or a software/hardware failure on the aircraft. The flight control software has a "failsafe" mode, so that when the radio link between aircraft and operator is lost, the aircraft will immediately head for home (where it was launched from). Raven B has a rescue beacon in the tail, that puts out a location signal. If a helicopter can be used, the downed Raven can be quickly retrieved and repaired. The big advantage with Raven is that it's simple, reliable, and it works. A complete system (controller, spare parts and three UAVs) costs $240,000. The UAV can be quickly taken apart and put into a backpack. It takes off by having the operator start the motor, and then throwing it. This can be done from a moving vehicle, and the Raven is a popular recon tool for convoys. It lands by coming in low and then turning the motor off. Special Forces troops like to use it at night, because the enemy can't see it, and often can't hear it as well. The controller allows the operator to capture video, or still pictures, and transmit them to other units or a headquarters. The operator often does this while the Raven is flying a pre-programmed pattern (using GPS). The operator can have the UAV stop and circle, in effect keeping the camera on the same piece of ground below. The operator can also fly the Raven, which is often used when pursuing hostile gunmen. Larger UAVs (like the 350 pound U.S. Army Shadow 200, and Predator type aircraft) are being equipped with better anti-collision devices. Research indicates that UAVs equipped with these new systems will be less prone to collision than small commercial aircraft (which typically have only one pilot, who is often distracted while in the air.)