Bharat Rakshak

Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
It is currently 28 Nov 2014 11:30

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1815 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 ... 46  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 01 Apr 2012 21:24 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
On a lighter note may be we need such weapons to control our netas :rotfl:

Putin allows high-tech gun that hits nervous system

Quote:
LONDON: Russian president-elect Vladimir Putin has given the go-ahead to a gun that uses electromagnetic radiation to attack a victims' central nervous system, a British media report said.

The "psychotronic" can effectively turn people into zombies -- a dead person that can be given the semblance of life and controlled at will.

The futuristic weapons developed by Russian scientists could be used against enemies and Russian dissidents, the Daily Mail reported.

Sources said Putin described the guns as "entirely new instruments for achieving political and strategic goals".

"Such high-tech weapons systems will be comparable in effect to nuclear weapons, but will be more acceptable in terms of political and military ideology," he was quoted as saying.

Precise details of the gun have not been revealed. But previous research has shown that low-frequency waves can affect brain cells, alter psychological states and make it possible to transmit commands directly into someone's thought processes.

High doses of microwaves can damage the functioning of internal organs, control behaviour or even drive victims to suicide.

Plans to introduce the weapons were announced recently by Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov.

"The development of weaponry based on new physics principles -- direct-energy weapons, geophysical weapons, wave-energy weapons, genetic weapons, psychotronic weapons, and so on -- is part of the state arms procurement programme for 2011-2020," Serdyukov said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Apr 2012 21:27 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31
Posts: 4657
:)

if the weapon was developed by the west then its a non lethal safe weapon developed by the good decent folks of the West

but if it is the Russians it makes people into zombies


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Apr 2012 22:17 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
I imagine the KGB has long had suitcase sized EMP/microwave weapons. they planned to disrupt western airbases and naval ports using such means

the kind of guys who could cook up Burya (90t, 20m long brahmos-mki) in 1954 are truly out of the box thinkers, unbound by any textbook :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Apr 2012 12:10 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
Top Ten Countries by Military Spending, 2011

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 Apr 2012 22:23 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
Nice write up on US Hypersonic Global Strike Program

Quote:
Advanced Hypersonic Weapon (AHW), United States of America

Design and capabilities of the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon

The AHW hypersonic glide body (HGB) vehicle has a conical design with winglets. It was designed to fit within the payload assembly. The structure is made of aluminium, titanium, steel, tantalum, tungsten, carbon fabric, silica and other alloys, including chromium and nickel.

HGB is powered by one lithium-ion actuator battery, two lithium-ion and five nickel manganese hydride batteries. Pressurised nitrogen gas is used as a propellant for the vehicle. Other equipment includes radio frequency transmitters and small electro-explosive devices.

The AHW is designed to provide a 6,000km range with 35 minute time-of-flight and achieve less than ten metre accuracy. It delivers a conventional payload at medium and global ranges, using a hypersonic glider.

The weapon's high manoeuvrability allows it to avoid flight over third party nations when approaching the target. It employs a precision guidance system to home in on the target.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2012 19:19 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
Israel Establishes Strategic Covert Operations Force

Quote:
The Israeli military has established a “depth corps” force to coordinate and execute multi-disciplinary missions far from the country's borders. The primary task of the corps, says Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, chief of the general staff, will be to extend joint operations into strategic theaters.Modeled after the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command

creation of the depth corps force indicates Israel's military envisions that long-range, largely clandestine and multi-service missions will have a much higher priority than the conventional operations that have been the main focus of its activity for decades. It also suggests that Israel expects future wars to be long, difficult and not winnable only by fighting along its own borders.

The decision to establish the command stems from an assessment of the strategic shifts resulting from popular revolutions in the Arab world and Middle East, where moderate or predictable countries could become dominated by Islamic and even jihadist elements, as well as from the threat posed by a nuclear Iran.

Defense minister Ehud Barak and Gantz created the corps after recommendations from a team headed by Maj. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot. Eizenkot was tapped for the task last summer, after he completed his assignment as commander of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Northern Command, which is responsible for the border with Lebanon and the Golan Heights.

The new corps will be commanded by Maj. Gen. Shai Avital, 59, a former chief of the elite Sayeret Matkal commando force, veteran covert operations expert and close associate of Barak. Avital was recalled to active duty to head the corps, which is unusual. Gantz and Barak thought that the leader of such a command based on various special forces, each with their own capabilities and fighting traditions, would have to be a commander with the unique authority and experience to gain the confidence of subordinates during missions.

Predictably, some are calling the corps “the Iran Command.” Israel has a command for Iran affairs—namely, the Mossad intelligence agency—which has been doing the heavy lifting in the campaign against the Iranian nuclear threat. If there is any unit within the IDF that deals with Iran specifically, it is the Israeli air force (IAF), the service that will be called upon in the event of an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Gantz instructed Eizenkot to assess recent developments and strategic shifts in the region to determine whether the IDF needed to make changes in its planning. In reviewing past assessments, Eizenkot's team, which comprised high-ranking officers and one senior Mossad official, discovered that the need for a deep-strike force had been identified as far back as 1982, when a decision was made to create a depth corps at the general staff level. Implementation was delayed until 1986 as a result of the First Lebanon War, which took place in 1982. Maj. Gen. (ret.) Doron Rubin was named head of the unit, but fallout from the raid it orchestrated against a base in Lebanon of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command in December 1988, code-named Operation Blue and Brown, shut down the command. During the operation, which took place in Nueimeh, four Golani Regiment soldiers were left behind and had to be rescued under fire by IAF Cobra helicopters. The soldiers, clutching the skids of the Cobras, were flown out to sea for pickup by Israeli navy boats. Rubin stepped down afterward and the special operations unit was absorbed into the Northern Command.

The mission concept will be split into two categories. The corps will work primarily with special forces and at times oversee their covert operations, or operate directly, but covertly, against targets—for example, Iran and its nuclear facilities—on the ground, should an air attack take place. The corps will have the authority to deploy special operations units when necessary, but under normal circumstances each unit's chain of command will remain unchanged.

The rationale behind the unit is that long-range operations require extensive cooperation between different parts of the defense establishment. To effectively combat Iran's nuclear ambitions, arms smuggling to Hamas, Hezbollah and worldwide terror organizations, certain units must work together, such as military intelligence, the Mossad and others. Military branches need to join forces (especially the air force and navy), and commanders and their subordinates need to coordinate activities. The corps will oversee training and operations by special forces in an effort to enable each unit to retain its unique capabilities, while operating with better coordination and less competition with each other.

Units tapped for missions will be placed under the corps' control according to mission function, and perform pre-planned or ad-hoc operations during war and inter-war periods. The corps itself is subordinate to the IDF chief of staff.

If a mission requires taking control of a sector in an enemy's rear zone, the command could be assigned responsibility, for example, to secure an area where strategic weapons are being smuggled.

For the IDF, the depth corps is a new concept for special forces. “Until now, few operations were carried out by more than one special forces unit,” says Brig. Gen. (res.) Ilan Paz, former air force special forces commander. “The establishment of the new command will be justified only if it succeeds in achieving the synergy between the various units and becomes a force multiplier capable of implementing their special capabilities.”

Experts warn that this synergy will be difficult to achieve. Each IDF special operations unit has its own fighting tradition gained over decades of clandestine actions and has been almost entirely self-sufficient during missions. Sayeret Matkal, for one, arguably the most storied special forces ground unit, has conducted extremely complex and spectacular missions over the years, most of which are still classified.

“At the end of the day,” says Brig. Gen. (ret.) Dov Sedaka, former commander of Sayeret Matkal, the command's success or failure will depend on the authority it displays over subordinate units, each with unique training and capabilities. “If it coordinates them wisely, taking account of their characteristics, it could become a tremendous force multiplier.”

While Israel's special forces have had spectacular successes, there has been a sense within the general staff since the Second Lebanon War in 2006 that the units could do more if they worked together more closely and there was better coordination between their respective branches. The corps could assist in mobilizing special forces for missions. More important, it will have the job of planning and leading operations in areas far beyond Israel's borders, operations that are connected to the covert war against terror organizations and thus indirectly against Iran. These operations would be similar to those that have been ascribed to Israel, such as alleged IAF strikes and special forces missions in Sudan against terror networks.

“What is happening today is that actions in the strategic depth area are largely the result of some momentary flash,” a senior officer who helped draft the recommendations told the newspaper Haaretz. “An officer goes to military intelligence with an idea, and they start working on an operation. The corps, headed by a major general, would consider the threats methodically and continuously, and we hope it will lead to solutions and results,” he said.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 May 2012 20:29 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
US did the same thing after 9/11 and the OIF/Afghan wars started. CIA + SEALS + Delta force work in teams now. I think Gen McChrystal was instrumental in pushing through this new mode of working for more timely closed loop, all signoff players at same table intel analysis and direct action. before ISAF commander he was JSOC commander for 5 yrs.

in our context perhaps RR + CRPF + state police SOG + IB + state police CID co-operating closely in a daily scrum in COIN ops would be a close analogue if it were to happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 May 2012 07:08 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Posts: 2457
Location: USA
Just watching 60 minutes and the F 22. This super duper fighter costing a cool 150 mil seems to have big problems. Not only it was never used in combat but fully 18% have suffered from hypoxia at one time or the other. It was grounded once and even though it is flying it is only on training missions. Did they not deploy this fighter recently to middle east? Looks like the US airforce is not able solve the problem inspite of spending a lot of resources.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 May 2012 08:07 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
oxygen issue will be fixed. but nothing can save a product from imperfect requirements capture or the 'market' itself shifting away from the niche the product was designed for. more specialized the product more the risk of market transitions affecting . eg a good computer will take any SW and remain relevant. a hardcode ASIC based music player that only plays Qawalis will have no demand if people dont like qawalis sometime later.

its not feasible to fix the kind of bulky 2000lb GBU and CBU munitions that get the job done within its slim internal bay. SDB hype is there but not useful for area targets and large structures. hence it will need to carry such bombs and missiles externally as the teens do, which kills its RCS VLO and affects its aerodynamic figures . I suspect the wings are also not strong enough to carry the kind of payloads the Teens do, being designed for a clean internals only config.

so as a product its a evolutionary dead end. they will find some use for it to keep it funded and in service but major changes or updates will no longer be on cards. instead funds will go with JSF and UCAVs

by the time PLAAF gets stealth fighters into squadron service, the F22 will likely have retired out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 May 2012 18:16 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28
Posts: 1179
Quote:
costing a cool 150 mil seems


It actually costs a not so cool 400 million now.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/05 ... ts-mutiny/

the latest programmatic unit cost of the F-35 is 161 million and even that may rise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 May 2012 06:02 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Posts: 11302
Location: Revive Sanskrit
Austin wrote:


Very, very interesting.

India needs to support this development.

In fact, India needs to lease Socotra from Yemen (keep it pristine too) and get some boots in Berbera and Aden (a place that India developed for the British).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 15 May 2012 15:12 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
No further cuts as UK balances 10-year defence budget

Quote:
The UK will be able to meet its military spending priorities for the next 10 years without having to make additional cuts to its personnel or equipment profiles, defence secretary Philip Hammond announced on 14 May.

Marking the completion of a delayed planning round process for 2012, Hammond's statement confirmed that the Ministry of Defence's long-term funding has been brought into balance, with £152 billion ($245 billion) to be available over the next decade, plus an un-allocated contingency of £8 billion. The department's actions of the last 18 months have removed a previously-identified shortfall of £38 billion. "The black hole in the defence budget has finally been eliminated," Hammond says.

All major aircraft programmes remain in place. These include the Eurofighter Typhoon, Lockheed Martin F-35, Airbus Military A400M and A330 Voyager tanker/transport, plus investments in rotorcraft and complex weapons.

"We will not commit to any programme without a 10-year budget line," Hammond says, describing the stance as representing a model of new financial discipline. "This department has seen its reputation tarnished in the past," he says. "I am determined for it to turn a new leaf."

"Although transformation is an important process, the result must be about delivering capability," says Gen Sir David Richards, Chief of the Defence Staff. "We are now in a position to build."

Hammond's announcement follows a change of direction for the UK's future purchase of the F-35, which he confirmed on 10 May. This will see the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm operate the fifth-generation type in its short take-off and vertical landing guise, rather than the C-model carrier variant. All three armed service chiefs agreed to the switch, which should allow the navy to bring both of its Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers into service from early in the next decade.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 May 2012 21:41 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
tough problem here:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Facing a mysterious safety problem with the Air Force's most-prized stealth fighter, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Tuesday ordered new flight restrictions on the F-22 and summoned help from Navy and NASA experts.

Panetta endorsed Air Force efforts to figure out why some F-22 pilots have experienced dizziness and other symptoms of an oxygen shortage while flying, but his personal intervention signaled a new urgency. A secretary of defense does not normally get involved in a service-specific safety issue unless it is of great concern.

The Air Force grounded its F-22s for four months last year because of the oxygen-deficit problem, and now some pilots are refusing to fly them. An Air Force advisory panel headed by a retired Air Force general studied the problem for seven months and reported in March that it could not pinpoint the root cause. It endorsed a plan keeping the aircraft flying, however, with pilots using special sensors, filters and other safety precautions.

Panetta was briefed on the problem last Friday, just days after a CBS "60 Minutes" report featured two F-22 pilots who said that during some flights they and other pilots have experienced oxygen deprivation, disorientation and other problems. They cited safety concerns as well as the potential for long-term personal health issues.

Asked why Panetta was acting now, Navy Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said the defense chief has been aware of the F-22 problem "for quite some time." In light of the recent deployment of several F-22s to the Persian Gulf and because of pilots' expressions of alarm, Panetta chose to "dive a little more deeply into the issue."

In a letter to Air Force Secretary Michael Donley, Panetta ordered that F-22 flights remain "within proximity of potential landing locations" so that pilots can land quickly in the event they experience an oxygen-deficit problem. Kirby said the specifics of those flight restrictions are to be set by individual F-22 pilots and commanders.

Panetta also told Donley to accelerate the installation of an automatic backup oxygen system in each F-22. The first of those is to be ready for use by December, Kirby said.

And the Pentagon chief ordered the Air Force to call on the expertise of the Navy and NASA in pursuit of a solution.

Panetta's actions have no immediate effect on U.S. combat operations, since the F-22 is not in Afghanistan. But Panetta said the plane would give up long-distance air patrol missions in Alaska until the planes have an automatic backup oxygen system installed or until Panetta agrees the F-22 can resume those flights. Other aircraft will perform those missions in the meantime.

Panetta's chief spokesman, George Little, told reporters that Panetta supports the Air Force's efforts to get to the bottom of the problem.
"However, the safety of our pilots remains his first and foremost concern," Little said.

Little did not rule out Panetta taking additional measures. Asked whether Panetta considered grounding the fleet again, Little said Tuesday's less drastic moves are "the prudent course of action at this time," adding that Panetta will keep a close eye on the situation, "and all options remain on the table going forward."

In a conference call with reporters, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., and Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., said they were briefed by the Air Force and told that the number of pilots who came forward with complaints has risen from two to nine. Warner called Panetta's action a "step in the right direction" but said questions still remain.

"This is a confidence issue that has to be addressed fully and transparently by the Air Force," Warner said.
The F-22 Raptor, which has never flown in combat, recently deployed to the United Arab Emirates for what the Pentagon called routine partnering with a Middle East ally. Little, the spokesman, told reporters that Panetta's order to impose new flight restrictions would not affect flight operations during the UAE deployment.

The plane, conceived during the Cold War as a leap-ahead technology that could penetrate the most advanced air defenses, is seen by some as an overly expensive luxury not critical to fighting current conflicts. The fleet of 187 F-22s — the last of which was fielded just two weeks ago — cost an average of $190 million each.

Panetta's predecessor as Pentagon chief, Robert Gates, persuaded Congress to cap production of the F-22 earlier than originally planned. He saw it as primarily of use against a "near-peer" military competitor like China, noting that the plane did not fly a single combat mission during a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

With its stealth design, the F-22 is built to evade radar and has advanced engines that allow it to fly at faster-than-sound speeds without using afterburners. Its manufacturer, Lockheed Martin Corp., describes the plane as "the only fighter capable of simultaneously conducting air-to-air and air-to-ground combat missions with near impunity."

The fleet of 170 F-22s is stationed at six U.S. bases: Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska: Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii; Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va.; Nellis Air Force Base, Nev.; Holloman Air Force Base, N.M.; and Tyndall Air Force Base, Fla.
F-22 pilots are trained at Tyndall. Flight testing is at Edwards Air force Base, Calif., and operational testing and tactics development is performed at Nellis.
___
Associated Press writer Donna Cassata contributed to this report.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 16 May 2012 21:57 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16
Posts: 2421
Location: USA - A fully owned subsidiary of India Inc.
great...khanate spent a trillion of craptor...now no ones wants to fly em... if jsf fails too ,(which I seriously hope it does) ,it might be the end of the amreeki dominance in mil aviation...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Jun 2012 15:47 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
Will India Ever Really Be America's Partner?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 12 Jun 2012 17:45 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
in american lingo partner = gubo , so they need to redefine partner to the dictionary sense of the word.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jun 2012 09:13 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9292
Flight Blindness: Why F-35 pilots suddenly have the jitters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jun 2012 10:34 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
the helmet looks like something out of hellboy proto-nazi gear with hellboys stub horns added .http://focusfeatures.com/uploads/image/ ... ea/950.jpg
unless the helmet works, the JSF "flying wine barrel-MKI" vision of avoiding turning combat, but blowing straight at high speed, releasing high off-boresight missile shots is unworkable with a more normal HUD.

and before a JSF groupie beats me up, let me post the "manouverability is irrelevant" claim
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-d ... verab.html


http://aviationintel.com/2011/08/03/f-3 ... er-at-all/
The F-35s Distributive Aperture System (DAS) is amongst it’s strongest attributes. It makes sense that it could cue High-Off-Bore-Sight (HOBS) missiles to their targets via data-link, without the launching aircraft needing to turn almost at all. In other words, at the merge, when traditionally fighter pilots begin employing aggressive maneuvering tactics in order to put the enemy into a defensive position, ending in a succesful weapons employment solution, the F-35 would simply fire it’s HOBS short-range missile while accelerating away from the fight. The missile would make close to and 180′ turn toward the enemy while they are in a vulnerable, energy depleting turn. In theory the enemy would be either destroyed by the missile or they would lose larger amounts of energy trying to defeat it while the F-35 has accelerated out of the within visual range fight.

As I have talked about before, aerial beyond visual range targeting in a net centric battlefield will be provided increasingly by remote sensors such as AWACS, ship based radar and via other tactical aircraft, so it would make sense that DAS could utilize the F-35′s advanced data-link to direct properly equipped short-range missiles as well. The AIM-9X Block II looks to be that exact missile for the job. Now in the late stages of testing, the AIM-9X Block II will feature lock-on-after-launch capability and a data link receiver which are both needed to take advantage of the F-35′s DAS system and tactics as described above.

That being said this is even a larger argument for my continued support of a stealth, supercruising regional attack/interceptor aircraft. Why make a fighter sized aircraft at all when you can have much greater range, speeed, and weapons carriage capability with a larger fighter-bomber sized airframe while still being able to protect yourself within visual range??? The DAS system is not unique to the F-35, a similar system can be integrated into any airframe. So why is the USAF spending hundreds of billions of dollars on an aircraft that is a fighter but does not need to be a fighter??

This also makes a strong case for the F-22 to receive a DAS or upgrade its advanced missile warning system to provide the same capability. I think we are going to be getting into the realm of “imagine the F-22 with the F-35s avionics” pretty soon here. What we need is just that, a stretched regional attack FB-22 with much greater fuel and munitions payload and the avionics system of an F-35. The number one thing Raptor pilots wish for is more missiles, I say we give it to them. If the J-20 goes into production and is sold around the globe, this may not just be logical but totally necessary. The problem is the JSF eats up so much of the USAF budget for the next 30 years that this may be impossible. You can see my alternative plan to the JSF here: http://aviationintel.com/?p=1185, its amazing what we could buy while still saving money if we used the JSF as a research and development program, taking its avionics suite and integrating it into more affordable or more capable aircraft in the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jun 2012 10:44 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
What we need is just that, a stretched regional attack FB-22 with much greater fuel and munitions payload and the avionics system of an F-35. The number one thing Raptor pilots wish for is more missiles, I say we give it to them.

and that might just be the PAKFA :mrgreen: though it will feature TVC and turn with the raptor as well :twisted:

20 years later than raptor, but the most formidable foe of all is "imperfect requirements definition" - :lol: - no amt of inspired engineering can defeat that one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jun 2012 17:21 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Jan 2009 19:24
Posts: 157
Location: Bangalore
The USAF with the F-22 seems to have stumbled into an area of aeromedicine where there is precious little data to work with. The problem seems to be in altitudes above 44,000 ft, where the Raptor with its engines have an unparalled advantage but pilot life support systems are having difficulties. An interesting debate and investigation is underway, I'm sure being watched closely by us, the Russians and the Chinese, as our new aircraft will break this barrier too.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/sources-too-soon-to-rule-out-toxins-in-raptor-case-373144/

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/combat-edge-anti-g-ensemble-might-be-causing-raptors-oxygen-woes-372642/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jun 2012 18:31 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 08 Oct 2009 17:28
Posts: 1179
He He.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ind ... ef=wl_home

Quote:
BANGALORE, JUNE 19:
The Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) plans to inaugurate a new facility of the Defence Bioengineering & Electromedical Laboratory (DEBEL) on Wednesday.

A release from the organisation said that DEBEL is a life sciences laboratory of the DRDO that carries out research and development in the areas of aero-medical equipment, human engineering related to aviation, biomedical engineering and life support systems for the armed forces.

DEBEL is currently engaged in the development of integrated life support systems for new generation aircraft like LCA and technical textiles specifically targeted for military applications.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jun 2012 21:02 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 12 Feb 2009 06:40
Posts: 573
Location: Mumbai
Lockheed, Boeing and Eurofighter place formal bids for Seoul’s F-X III requirement

Quote:
Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and the Eurofighter consortium have presented formal bidding documents to South Korea for the 60 aircraft F-X III competition.

The receipt of the formal bids was announced by Seoul's Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) on its website. It expects to make a decision by October.

The presentation was largely a formality, as the three companies have already mounted extensive campaigns for the requirement.
Lockheed Martin is pitching its F-35A, Boeing the F-15 Silent Eagle, and the Eurofighter Consortium the Typhoon.

Notably absent is Sukhoi.
Seoul had invited the Russian manufacturer to pitch its developmental PAK FA (designated the T-50).
In January, South Korean media reports said Sukhoi did not attend a meeting at DAPA where contenders received the request for proposal (RFP) for the competition.

The reports had also suggested that Swedish aircraft maker Saab had attended the RFP meeting, but it appears the company is not bidding its JAS39 Gripen.


According to Seoul's Yonhap news agency, the aircraft will be judged by four primary criteria and 150 secondary criteria.
The four main criteria are cost, capability, inter-operability with South Korean forces and industrial benefits.
Seoul is likely to require the F-X III winner to provide significant help with its indigenous KFX fighter programme.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Jun 2012 12:11 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41
Posts: 606
Russia Buying Western Weapons


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Jun 2012 00:54 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 14 Nov 2004 21:26
Posts: 565
Army scraps eye-catching pixel camo uniforms

Quote:
After eight years and a reported $5 billion in development, the U.S. Army is ditching its pixelated-looking uniform in favor of something that doesn't look like it was borrowed from the "Contra" Nintendo game :mrgreen:. The design, known as the Universal Camouflage Pattern (UCP), has failed at doing what camo should do: Hide our soldiers. "If we can see our own guys across a distance because of it, then so can our enemy," one Army specialist said. According to insiders, the design was selected after the Marines had switched to an eye-catching pixel-driven pattern. "That's what this really comes down to," the editor of Soldier Systems Daily said. "'We can't allow the Marine Corps to look more cool than the Army.'"

On a related note: The Army's uniform is closely modelled on the Marine pattern, which they could not use because the Marines patented it. Why? Because it was a part of the Marines' unique identity, which they didn't want the Army stealing, etc. etc. At that time, a marine spokesman said, “We want to be instantly recognized as a force to be reckoned with. We want them to see us coming a mile away in our new uniforms”. True story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 29 Jun 2012 20:40 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Posts: 4558
Location: Duke Nukem
Researchers use spoofing to hack into a flying drone
Encrypted GPS hacked and used to take control of a drone ! :-?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2012 00:03 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
perhaps that is what Iran used to bring down the US drone...thats what they claimed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2012 00:13 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49
Posts: 4984
A comment from the JSF article that Singha linked

Quote:
Why do I have a sinking feeling that the sales-pitch from Lockheed consisted of showing the Top Brass an advanced screening of Iron Man 2, with the salesdude finishing his pitch with a loud "Now THAT'S what we're talking about! YEAH! Bitchin', man!!!!!" while he pumps the air and hi-fives all the Generals 'n' Majors.



Didn't anyone think to show the Top Brass all those home-made videos where they stick a video cam on the helmet of a downhill skier or a Nascar driver, and quietly explain: "Guys, that's what real-life looks like when you go at high speed with a helmet stuck on your head".


:rotfl:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2012 08:03 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27
Posts: 9292
Two book lists

1 2


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2012 08:05 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31
Posts: 2365
Singha wrote:
...alternative plan to the JSF here: http://aviationintel.com/?p=1185

Speculation on stealth drones is fine on paper for specialized combat niches but they cannot and will not take over the tasks of manned warplanes anytime soon. And relegating a large chunk of manned air forces to older airframes like the F-15/16/18 for the next two or three decades when the likes of the J-20 and T-50 are coming on stream is a complete non-starter with the US military and Congress.

Though still very potent, the F-15/16/18 are less prepared to survive air defence advances than even moderate 5th gen aircraft and are simply not the airplanes to carry a leading military into the 1st half of the 21st century. The F-22 is a hand built machine that cannot become what the US and its allies want--a manned, mass producible next-gen multirole warplane to form the common backbone of their air forces in the next 20-50 years. To force it to is to essentially redesign it from scratch. It's therefore not about economics and the F-35 will definitely happen sooner rather than later as they have absolutely no alternative to it. We need to focus on our own huge challenges in this regard.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2012 08:18 
Offline
Forum Moderator

Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Posts: 33778
Location: Col of the regiment, ORR JTF unit
well the Teens need not be the tip of spear anymore. Day1 offensives against C3I and SAM nodes would be conducted with a mix of cruise missiles (multiple types like thawk,jassm) , a limited number of strike UCAVs with SDB, Growlers and the new MALD drone that apparently has range of 750km. throw in some hypersonic global strike weapons as well for shock and awe effects made for CNN. send in a few B1 to pound some camp with 80 JDAMs.

considering the US has no stomach to pick a fight with the PRC or TSP, the only other candidates look modest as in Iran, Syria types. even the Teens can defeat them but the above will reduce casualties to minimum while the air is made safe for the Teens and bombers to go in and start a long bombing campaign.

JSF is a kind of test case for manufacturability and opex of VLO aircraft. ..if it cannot be done on budget and with interchangeable parts, even after khan throwing the kitchen sink at it, its unlikely anyone else like EU, japan, soko, Rus will be able to - khan is rather good at the costly end of the manufacturing process.

Russia pragmatically does not seem to be even trying for such tolerances and uber-paranoid emission control and passive targeting and has come up with the PAKFA, whose tolerances , materials, capabilities and design is at a level which their industry can handle. and we are along for the ride.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Jun 2012 22:46 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31
Posts: 13249
Check how military is used to expand economic growth in new region.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthre ... 48&page=31
Quote:
Naval Convergence Theory?

Finally, Russian naval strategy, as manifested in its operations, pronouncements, and budgets, is becoming well aligned with Russian national-security strategy—perhaps as its principal military tool. This strategy, as noted earlier, seeks to enhance both national prosperity and Russia’s stature. Military power is aimed primarily at preventing war, but otherwise is considered another element of national power, used principally in support of Russia’s economic growth. This same message is repeated throughout our own guidelines, A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower . 15

While Russian and American strategies refer to regional warfighting capability in concert with allies, both nations’ military forces primarily exist to foster stability, trust, prosperity, and cooperation. Both strategies also acknowledge that, while sovereignty disputes and natural-resource competition may spark future conflict, each navy’s most likely principal challenges are terrorist networks, criminal elements, and natural disasters.

This logic could likewise underpin the argument for the relative importance of American naval power, enabling us to become an “offshore balancer” after we withdraw from ground wars in the Middle East and Central Asia. However, it almost certainly argues for major changes in the size, shape, and composition of the future Russian military, and particularly in its navy.

The historic Russian obsession with large standing armies of conscripts created an unaffordable military tool without a credible mission. Even the technologically sophisticated portions of the Russian military aimed at offensive operations against large nation-states have become problematic, and this leaves the need for a smaller, professional, military capable of defending Russian borders and combating domestic disruptions caused by terrorists and nationalist movements. It also calls for a military force whose principal role is to project the Russian image abroad and ensure the security of all Russian economic expansion. This is the strategic and ever-widening niche for the future Russian navy.

These trends may result in a rise back into the upper crust of the world’s navies. However, we are more likely to see Russian warships operating in multinational antipiracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden than trailing American carrier strike groups in the Pacific or the Mediterranean. These antipiracy patrols will increasingly be carried out by small, fast, stealthy multimission platforms. The very likely increased Russian presence in the Arctic Ocean will have more to do with global trade and oil security than it will with bastion defense of ballistic-missile submarines. Russian task groups in the Caribbean will be increasing Russia’s international stature as well as selling arms to Latin American nations, rather than threatening American military exercises. The U.S. task is to be able to discriminate those military activities required by an expanding economy from those that challenge vital U.S. interests as our national-security strategy moves into the second decade of the 21st century. The U.S. Navy’s maritime strategy just might have struck a resonant chord in Moscow.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 01 Jul 2012 21:07 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Posts: 3898
Location: Somewhere Else
WARSIM Wobbles Into Action

After eight years of effort, and spending over $300 million, the U.S. Army has officially received its new wargame (WARSIM) for training battalion, brigade, division, and as big as you want to get, commanders, and their staffs. Now even the most elaborate commercial wargame would not get $300 million for development, and eight years to create the system. But wargames for professional soldiers have different requirements, and a troublesome Department of Defense bureaucracy to deal with. First, the requirements. Commercial wargames shield the player from all the boring stuff (support functions, especially logistics.) But professional wargames must deal with these support activities, because in a real war, these are the things commanders spend most of their time tending too. Sad, but true, and it?s why you have the ancient military quip, ?amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.? Professionals also study personnel issues. A division commander will also know his half dozen combat and support brigade commanders very well, and the 15 or so battalion commanders well enough to know who is ready for a promotion to brigade commander, and who has to be supervised a little more carefully. Actually deciding where the combat units go, and when they attack or defend, takes up little of a commanders time, especially for higher level commands (divisions and larger.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 03 Jul 2012 19:57 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 21 Sep 2008 07:57
Posts: 1049
Location: Baudland
Quote:
Image


via http://www.aame.in/2012/07/ballistic-mi ... ystem.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jul 2012 22:48 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
Iran's latest Great Prophet 7 exercise some videos



Iran has developed an anti-ship ballistic missile using the fateh 110 missile

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mQ8_xaPYSI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jul 2012 23:13 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Posts: 2983
Location: PA, USA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jul 2012 23:14 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Posts: 2983
Location: PA, USA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jul 2012 23:14 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Posts: 2983
Location: PA, USA


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jul 2012 20:25 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 15 May 2010 02:52
Posts: 1048
Location: Padvaralli


Domino at a military parade in Belarus


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012 18:21 
Offline
BRFite

Joined: 09 Oct 2009 17:36
Posts: 1440
Location: Behind Enemy Lines
Army's 'sense and avoid' radar will let drones fly in domestic airspace


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Jul 2012 23:21 
Offline
BRF Oldie

Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31
Posts: 11603
Pantsir-S1 seen with new Janus Faced Radar



Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1815 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 ... 46  Next

All times are UTC + 5:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, jjambunathan, parikh, Sachin, suryag and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group