Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

International Military Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17605
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Philip » 09 Sep 2016 13:16

NoKo has just tested its 5th N-device.Along with its successful SLBM test ,NoKo is demonstrating a huge surge in its N-capability that is sending Japan and SoKo the jitters.

Meanwhile,O'Bomber's mil largesse to the Soothi Barbarians. Much of this weaponry would've gotten into the hands of ISIS as well.

Obama administration offered $115b​n in weapons to Saudi Arabia: report
According to a new report, offers over eight years totalled more than any previous administration and were intended to replenish arsenal after war in Yemen
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... bia-report
Saudi Arabia weapons
Members of the activist group CodePink hold a rally to protest US weapons sales to Saudi Arabia in Washington DC on Wednesday. Photograph: UPI /
Julian Borger Washington
Thursday 8 September 2016 18.10 BST Last modified on Friday 9 September 2016 00.55 BST

The Obama administration has offered to sell $115bn worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia over its eight years in office, more than any previous US administration, according to a new report.

The surge in sales is in part to reassure the Saudi monarchy of US backing in the wake of last year’s nuclear deal with Tehran, which raised fears in the Gulf that Washington would tilt more towards Tehran in its foreign policy.

The report’s author, William Hartung of the Centre for International Policy, said another factor was a drive by US arms manufacturers to boost sales to compensate declining procurement by the Pentagon. However, the most recent deals – such as the offer to sell more than 150 M1A2 Abrams battle tanks for an estimated $1.15bn – were principally intended to replenish the Saudi arsenal, depleted in the war in Yemen.

“I think that though the Obama administration is not thrilled about the Yemen episode; it feels it can’t stay out of it, because of the need to reassure the Saudis,” Hartung said.

His report found that since taking office in January 2009, the Obama administration has offered to sell $115bn in weapons to Saudi Arabia, half of which are accounted for by deals that are still in the pipeline.

“There are $57bn in sales in formal agreements so far, which is also head and shoulders above other administrations,” Hartung said.

The report comes as concerns about the UK’s arms sales to Saudi Arabia and their implication in potential war crimes in Yemen have split MPs on parliament’s arms control committee.

Arms sales over the eight years of the Obama administration have also included combat aircraft, attack helicopters, bombs, air-to-ground missiles, warships and military training. A division of Northrop Grumman is involved in a $4bn train-and-equip programme for the Saudi Arabian national guard, which has reportedly played a key role in the Yemen intervention.

The latest tank deal has drawn resistance from congressional Democrats, who have called for a freeze on arms sales to Saudi Arabia, because of its bombing of civilian targets in Yemen. UN officials have estimated that airstrikes by the Saudi-led coalition are responsible for most of the 3,000 civilian casualties in the war so far, twice as many as those caused by Houthi insurgents and other forces in the conflict put together.

Ted Lieu, a Democratic congresman from California, took a leading role in a letter by 64 members of Congress calling for the tank deal to be delayed, given the coalition’s campaign’s “deeply troubling impact on civilians”.

“I do not oppose assisting the country of Saudi Arabia, which has been a longstanding ally of the United States,” Lieu told the Guardian in a written statement. “What I do fundamentally oppose is continuing to sell arms to a military coalition that has repeatedly committed war crimes. The Saudi-led coalition has killed children, patients, doctors and newlyweds. A significant number of the killings of civilians by the Saudi coalition were nowhere near military targets. I will continue to do all that I can to see that the United States offers no support to Saudi Arabia’s operations in Yemen. The letter that 64 Members of the House sent last week shows that there is a growing chorus in Congress that shares these concerns.”

Tom Porteous, deputy programme director for Human Rights Watch, said: “As Human Rights Watch has documented in frequent field missions to bombing sites, US weapons are being used in coalition attacks that violate the laws of war and in some cases may constitute war crimes … To continue to sell arms is to fuel the flames and enable further violations.”

'Why do they target us?' Yemeni civilians pay the price of escalating crisis

The US has made appeals to Riyadh to do more to limit civilian casualties, and pointed to Riyadh’s creation of a committee to investigate incidents like the bombing of hospitals as progress in that direction. But the committee has shared information with the UN but not made its findings public. Hartung argued that such messages are least likely to be taken seriously while arms sales are booming.

“I think the US is such a significant supplier of bombs, ammunition, artillery and tanks and playing such an important role in the prosecution of the war in Yemen that there is signficant leverage,” he said. “If the US were to signal that part of that assistance would be frozen or withdrawn if they don’t show they are implementing measures to limit civilian casualties, that would send an effective message. I haven’t seen evidence that they have really made a convincing threat or statement on the consequences for the Saudis if they don’t stop. And any such message would be more powerful if other suppliers like the UK made similar statements.”

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35358
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby SaiK » 11 Sep 2016 02:10

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016 ... -vstan.cnn
Navy's $3B stealth warship sets sail
The $3 billion USS Zumwalt destroyer has left port in Maine and is on its way to an upcoming commissioning ceremony in Maryland.

rkhanna
BRFite
Posts: 998
Joined: 02 Jul 2006 02:35

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby rkhanna » 17 Sep 2016 13:13

Russia building a 400 Hecter Tactical City for Special Operations Training

"The 400-hectare complex will basically be a tactical city for working with all possible terrorist scenarios: liberating hostages in a school, on a bus or plane, in the metro and other public places.

The future elite fighters will also train for combating militants in forests and mountainous areas around the base."


https://sofrep.com/64094/ak-47s-stolen- ... ack-event/

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby shiv » 18 Sep 2016 09:33

http://www.popularmechanics.com/militar ... ce=twitter
100 Years Ago Today, Tanks Changed Warfare Forever
One hundred years ago today, on September 15th 1916, German soldiers looked out over the tops of their trenches and got a tremendous shock. Giant metal-covered vehicles, as large as a barn, were slowly advancing towards their position, moving forward in a caterpillar-like motion and spitting cannon and machine gun fire as they came. It was like nothing they'd ever seen before. This was the battle of Flers-Courcelette, and the age of the tank had arrived.

The tank was invented to break the stalemate of trench warfare on World War I's European battlefields. Artillery and machine guns, plentiful on both sides, were particularly effective against the main form of offense—the infantryman. As a result the defense was stronger than just about anything that could be thrown against it, so much so that infantrymen spent most of their time cowering in trenches and bunkers. When the infantry did attack, they would often outstrip their supporting machine gun fire, leaving them vulnerable to counterattacks.

Enter the tank. Designed to swing the pendulum back, the tank was destined to make the offense stronger than the defense and accompany the infantry in the attack, bringing along protected machine guns and cannons that would later be used to beat back the inevitable enemy counterattack.

The first tank, the British Army's Mark I, had a maximum speed of 3.7 miles an hour, a crew of eight, two six-pounder guns—meaning they fired high explosive shells weighing six pounds—and three Hotchkiss 8mm machine guns. This was enough to support an infantry attack in motion, and then provide a mobile fortification after a successful defense. They were notoriously unreliable, with about half of them breaking down at Flers-Courcelette. And while the finicky new machines of war were not quite enough to help Allies win the day decisively, they were fearsome enough that Allied commanders requested 1,000 more, cementing the tank's place on the battlefield.




--read it all in the link

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 60359
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: Lupine but moderately dharmic

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Singha » 18 Sep 2016 12:38

Russia testing new long endurance uuv

https://www.rt.com/news/359648-underwat ... lear-subs/

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15820
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby NRao » 18 Sep 2016 12:44

Exclusive Look Inside an All-Star Missile Defense Team

Image
Ask any sports fan and they will tell you: Strong teams have a strong defense.

When it comes to high stakes defense, nothing is more critical than missile defense. Destroying an incoming threat with impact from an intercepting missile, akin to a bullet hitting a bullet in mid-air, demands the highest degree of precision.

At Lockheed Martin, ballistic missile defense systems are designed to integrate and work together, layering systems to provide the highest quality of overall protection from any combination of threats. This layered defense keeps citizens, critical assets and deployed forces safe from current and future threats.

Now for the exclusive, let’s meet this all-star lineup!
USING SENSORS AND COMMUNICATIONS TO CONTROL THE OUTCOME
Image

At the heart of our layered defense is the Command and Control, Battle Management and Communications (C2BMC) system. It connects all of the ballistic missile defense elements – across space, air, land and sea – into a single network.

C2BMC receives data and intelligence from hundreds of missile defense sensors, radars and satellites. In fact, the Missile Defense Agency’s newest radar, the Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR), will allow the warfighter to identify threats in flight and determine whether the threat is real or a decoy.

Remote sensing—the monitoring, observing and gathering of information on the Earth and atmosphere from space—can be used to help soldiers on the battlefield by tracking ‘hot spots’ of infrared light. The Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) GEO satellites include a scanning sensor that provides a wide area surveillance of missile launches and natural phenomena across the earth, while the staring sensor can be tasked to observe smaller areas of interest with superior sensitivity

STOPPING A BALLISTIC MISSILE AT ITS PEAK
Image

After a ballistic missile is launched, it travels in a high, arcing path toward its target. The Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) system, which comprises the SPY-1 radar and MK 41 vertical launching system, can stop these hostile missiles in their tracks as they coast in space, both outside and inside the Earth’s atmosphere.
Aegis BMD also uses the Common Source Library, a system that allows rapid integration of new capabilities and processes across the fleet. And Aegis BMD is not limited to Navy ships – it’s adaptable and performs on land as Aegis Ashore.

Similar to Aegis, the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) relies on its radar and launcher to provide 360-degree air and missile defense from short-and medium-range ballistic missiles, and its open architecture design allows assets from partner nations to integrate into the regional defense systems. Now that is teamwork!

MEETING A THREAT HEAD-ON AT CLOSE RANGE
Image

As a threat begins its descent (or terminal phase), the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) and PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (PAC-3 MSE) missiles cut through the sky to intercept and eliminate the adversary.
THAAD, PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE all use “Hit-to-Kill” (HTK) technology which destroys a threat with body-to-body impact by the interceptor missile – releasing huge amounts of kinetic energy with extreme precision. Previous technology relied on blast fragmentation which often results in dangerous debris and is not lethal against weapons of mass destruction.

Joining the HTK pack, is the Miniature Hit-to-Kill (MTHK) interceptor. Designed for the close range threats of rockets, artillery and mortars, the MHTK uses the same “Hit-to-Kill” technology to destroy a close-range threat without blast fragmentation.

Small and mighty, the two-feet and five pound MHTK provides game-changing protection in this challenging ballistic battlespace.

jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5004
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby jamwal » 23 Oct 2016 22:09

Image

Image

Image
Image
The Kurdish Peshmerga militia is trying to liberate the Iraqi Mosul, captured by Islamic State,


What are these ?

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1410
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby manjgu » 23 Oct 2016 22:49

jugadd combat vehicles.. JCV !!

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5895
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby brar_w » 26 Oct 2016 18:41

Russian defence budget set to drop by 12%

Russian defence expenditure is set to fall by RUB371 billion (USD6 billion) by 2018 under new spending plans announced by the government. Total spending will fall from RUB3.1 trillion in 2016 to RUB2.728 trillion in 2018, a reduction of 12.0% in nominal terms.

The new spending plans were outlined in "The basic directions of budgetary policy for 2017 and the planning period of 2018 and 2019", published by the Russian Ministry of Finance (MoF) in October 2016. Based on current projections the expenditure on 'National Defence' will fall by 8.5% in 2017 to RUB2.836 trillion, and a further 3.8% to RUB2.728 trillion in 2017. Spending is then expected to begin to increase again in 2019 rising by 3.2% to RUB2.816 trillion. The Ministry of Finance had previously projected in July 2015 that spending would be approved at RUB3.065 trillion for 2017 and 2018. However, a rising budget deficit has prompted the Russian government to consolidate its fiscal position.

Russian defence expenditure will fall under the new budgetary projections from 3.8% of GDP in 2016 to 2.9% in 2019, its lowest level since 2012. The defence budget will also fall as a share of overall government spending from 23.8% in 2016 to 17.6% in 2019, the lowest level seen against this measure since 2013.

The document also suggests that expenditure on defence will eventually reach RUB3.889 trillion in 2016, 25.5% higher than the level currently approved under the 2016 budget. If this upward revision is approved, spending will reach record levels in 2016 representing a 22.5% increase over the previous high of RUB3.188 trillion that was approved in 2015.

As recently as July 2014, Russian budgetary plans had projected that defence expenditure would continue to increase in 2017 to reach a record level of RUB3.523 trillion by that time. The collapse in oil prices between July 2014 and January 2016 has however lead to a gradual deterioration of defence spending plans with Russia's budget deficit expected to grow to around 3.7% of GDP in 2016.

The reduction in spending will place further pressure on the modernisation goals laid out by the 2011-2020 State Armament Programme. Budgetary pressures have already seen the next iteration of the programme pushed back from 2016-2025 to 2018-2025. Furthermore, initial discussions over the level of spending for the new programme have led to inevitable disagreements between the Ministry of Finance (MoF) and the Ministry of Defence, which have proposed spending levels of RUB12 trillion and RUB24 trillion respectively. If approved, the revised spending targets for 2017-2019 will add weight to the MoF's call for a lower level of resourcing.

The significantly higher level of spending projected for 2016 in the MoF's new plans also suggest a major shift in budgetary planning assumptions. Defence ministry officials indicated in March 2016 that the defence budget could be cut by as much as 5% from approved levels in 2016 however planning documents and budget execution figures suggest no such cut will occur. The new figure for defence spending in 2016 is also perhaps indicative of the significant costs of Russian operations in Syria.


jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5004
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby jamwal » 10 Nov 2016 19:37

Image

Image

Image


Apparently, the circuit board in 1st image is Raspberry Pi. I use this thing as a torrent download and seeder box in my home. Ukrainians are using it in some kind of shoulder fired missile. Yellow band looks like a zip tie. Talk about use of off the shelf items and modular design. :D

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby shiv » 10 Nov 2016 22:46


jamwal
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5004
Joined: 19 Feb 2008 21:28
Location: Somewhere Else
Contact:

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby jamwal » 11 Nov 2016 19:03

Very interesting. Thanks.

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5895
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby brar_w » 12 Nov 2016 17:31

The Avenger ER has now flown. 20 Hour endurance and is now cleared to carry the 2000 lb. JDAM -

Image

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19750
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Austin » 01 Dec 2016 22:27

Air Force: Hypersonic Missiles From China, Russia Pose Growing Danger to U.S.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security ... anger-u-s/

Image

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5895
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby brar_w » 06 Dec 2016 16:37

First Japanese F-35A arrives at Luke

LUKE AIR FORCE BASE, Ariz. -- The F-35 program hit another milestone Nov. 28 with the arrival of the first Foreign Military Sales F-35 here.

The arrival marked the next step for the international F-35 training program as Japan took ownership of the first FMS aircraft to arrive at Luke.

“Today is a great day for the U.S. Air Force Reserve Command, Luke AFB, the 944th Fighter Wing, and the Japanese Air Self-Defense forces,” said Col. Kurt J. Gallegos, 944 FW commander. “We have a great team of Airmen who have worked hard to set up an outstanding training program and are ready to train our FMS counterparts.”

The aircraft was welcomed by a joint delegation from the 944 FW, 56th Fighter Wing, Lockheed Martin, and Japanese staff.

“Today I am thrilled for the Japan Air Self-Defense Force and Team Luke,” said Lt. Col. Sean Holahan, 944th Operations Group Detachment 2 commander. “The arrival of Japan’s first F-35A marks another important milestone in the steadfast relationship between our two nations, and the beginning of training for an elite cadre of JASDF fighter pilots and maintainers. We put an incredible amount of thought and effort into building the world’s first F-35 Foreign Military Sales training program from the ground up. To see Japan’s first jet on our flightline, surrounded by the men and women who have made this mission possible, is humbling.”

The arrival of the first FMS aircraft is the culmination of years of planning and hard work.

“The jet arrival marks the beginning of a new and exciting mission at Luke AFB to train our allies to fly the F-35A,” explained Lt. Col. Joe Bemis, 944 OG Det. 2 executive officer and resource advisor. “We have been preparing for this program for years. We have remodeled buildings, built a huge team of professional pilots, maintainers, and administration staff, and created specialized syllabus. We are hopeful that this mission will strengthen relationships between the US and nations that participate in the training.”

Over the next several years, Luke AFB will be training FMS pilots from Japan, Israel and South Korea along with partner nations including Australia, Italy, Norway, Turkey, Netherlands, Denmark, and Canada.

“This is such an important time in our wing’s history as we pick up the mission to train all FMS F-35 pilots,” said Gallegos. “It’s been almost 10 years since our wing has seen aircraft on our flightline. It is an amazing feeling to look outside and see the F-35s out there and know that we are playing such an important and critical role as we build relationships that will enhance our future partnership.”

In addition to the Foreign Military Sales mission led by the 944 OG/Det 2 Ninjas, Luke is scheduled to have six fighter squadrons and 144 F-35s.

Image



Nick_S
BRFite
Posts: 518
Joined: 23 Jul 2011 16:05
Location: Abbatabad

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Nick_S » 16 Dec 2016 04:20

V-22 could be a useful refueling tanker & cargo aircraft for IN carriers-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfkDfDhJ_JA



Lifts of Vikramaditya are too small, but might work on Vikrant.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19750
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Austin » 25 Dec 2016 16:20

Shot of 2016.

Image

Manish_P
BRFite
Posts: 884
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 17:34

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Manish_P » 25 Dec 2016 19:47

You mean Photoshop of 2016 ?

Kartik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3460
Joined: 04 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Kartik » 21 Jan 2017 01:34

Turkish Altay MBT program hit by engine technology transfer issues

Turkey's plans to build its Altay main battle tank (MBT) have hit a snag after Tümosan, the planned engine provider, cancelled a key technical support contract with Austria's AVL List GmbH.

The cancellation comes after Austria's parliament unanimously adopted a non-binding motion that imposed an arms embargo against Turkey in November 2016. As a result conditions were placed on the transfer of technology to Turkey. Austria made the move in response to Turkey's increasing violation of human rights since the failed military coup attempt in July 2016.

Tümosan has been tasked by the Turkish Undersecretariat for Defence Industries (SSM) with developing a local engine for the Altay MBT. The company brought in Austrian firm AVL List in 2015 to provide technology transfer and support in the development and integration of engines into the Altay tank. Due to the imposition of conditions on technology transfer, Tümosan cancelled the contract with AVL List on 17 January...


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19750
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Austin » 22 Jan 2017 12:38

French special forces operations in Iraq


Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19750
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Austin » 22 Jan 2017 14:44

President Trump, Vice Pres. Pence Review Troops


AdityaM
BRFite
Posts: 1802
Joined: 30 Sep 2002 11:31
Location: New Delhi

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby AdityaM » 22 Jan 2017 18:13

Image

Excellent camouflage

Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17605
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Philip » 23 Jan 2017 19:03

Great achievement! Our use of MIG-21s into their 6th decade is another shining example. One wonders too how long extra we could've kept our vintage Foxtrots in service too,esp. with the acute sub shrotage,for trg. and recce purposes.Based in the A&N islands,they would be excellent "eyes and ears" to monitor enemy forces transiting the Malacca Straits.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... ears-19150
Taiwan’s Ancient Submarine Will Reach an Astounding 80 Years in Service

Robert Beckhusen
January 22, 2017

Life expectancy varies between ships, but U.S. submarines generally stay in service for around 20 or 30 years or so. Taiwan, however, is planning for one of its submarines to reach age 80.

On Jan. 21, 2017, Taiwan announced that the 72-year-old SS-791 Hai Shih, or Sea Lion, will receive a retrofit allowing it to continue sailing until 2026. The $19 million retrofit will be to improve the hull and the diesel vessel’s “navigational elements,” Taiwan News reported.

Eight-zero. That’s a remarkable lifespan for a submarine, and the Hai Shih is already the oldest submarine still in service with a navy anywhere in the world — she looks like she traveled decades into the future through a wormhole.

Before she was Hai Shih, she was the U.S. Navy submarine USS Cutlass, a 1,570-ton Tench-class vessel that launched on Nov. 5, 1944 during World War II. Her wartime service was brief, and Cutlass didn’t reach her first patrol zone near the Kuril Islands until the day after Japan capitulated.

When the United States sold her to Taiwan in 1974, it sealed up Cutlass’ 10 torpedo tubes — six forward and four aft — and she became the Hai Shih. Very little has changed internally, apparently, but she still works.

A few years ago, researchers with the San Francisco Maritime National Park Association took a tour of the ex-Cutlass. “It was absolutely stunning how little has changed,” they wrote. “Equally stunning, is the high grade of operational condition.”

At the time, the 311-foot-long submarine still had a World War II-era Arma Mk 7 gyrocompass — one of a handful still working anywhere.

“Virtually all examples of these compasses were removed from the boats in the late 1950s and replaced with a smaller, easier to maintain (although less accurate) Sperry Mk 18s or later, modern Mk 19s,” the researchers wrote. “When we entered the control room there was the Arma gyrocompass, right where it should be, spinning, pointing north, and in use.”

“Over and over again this would happen during our time on these boats. We would find equipment running in perfect order that we had not imagined was retained, or maintained.”

It’s unclear if Hai Shih and the almost-as-ancient Hai Pao, Taiwan’s former Balao-class submarine that launched on Nov. 7, 1944 as the USS Tusk, are capable of combat. If the Hai Shih retrofit is successful, then Hai Pao’s service life could also be extended, according to Taiwan News.

Taiwan uses the submarines for training purposes, although sporadic reports citing Taiwanese officials over the years have indicated that their torpedo tubes had been unsealed. They are also capable of laying mines.

“Torpedo rooms forward and aft were operational and both carried test torpedoes,” Jane’s Defense Weekly reported in 2002.

“The Navy command recently took the unprecedented step of telling the media that [Hai Shih] was on an offshore mission, thus dispelling doubts about the World War II-era submarine still being useful and safe the next century,” Taiwan News noted.

But even if Hai Shih and Hai Pao are not combat-capable, the submarines could still be useful as reconnaissance vessels. They certainly would not match the Chinese navy, which could send dozens of submarines into Taiwan’s waters along with sub-hunting destroyers and aircraft.

Then again, if the antiques can still bite, they might pose a threat to some surface ships such as transport vessels.

Two other Taiwanese submarines, both Dutch-built Chien Lung class boats — based on the Zwaardvis class — carry torpedoes. And while those submarines are getting on in years, too, as they date to the mid-1980s, at least they’re not from World War II.

For Taiwan to build its own submarines would be an expensive — although not impossible — proposition requiring hard-to-find foreign assistance, and countries abroad have been wary of damaging relations with China by selling Taiwan modern subs or the technology to build them.

Taiwan has been researching how to do it, but it’s slow going.

So Taiwan, at least right now, doesn’t have many options but to keep its creaky, ancient submarines in service for a little while longer.

This first appeared in WarIsBoring here.

navneeet
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 41
Joined: 19 Jul 2010 22:16

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby navneeet » 24 Jan 2017 12:16

The Trident SLBM also fails.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/23/europe/trident-missile-failure-theresa-may/


Britain's Sunday Times newspaper reported that the missile veered towards the US coast, but the US official told CNN that this trajectory was part of an automatic self-destruct sequence. The official said the missile diverted into the ocean -- an automatic procedure when missile electronics detect an anomaly.

Rakesh
Webmaster BR
Posts: 3961
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Rakesh » 26 Jan 2017 20:48

Rambhas in the link....

Red Flag celebrates 40th anniversary
http://www.defenceaviation.com/2015/03/ ... rsary.html

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15820
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby NRao » 29 Jan 2017 05:37

The two China policy could possibly start some sort of a conflict. IF the US were to set up a diplomatic presence in Taiwan, then, yes, there is a chance.

I do not think preventing them from the SCS will do much to trigger an armed conflict.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15820
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby NRao » 29 Jan 2017 05:39


deejay
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3502
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby deejay » 29 Jan 2017 10:54

NRao wrote:...

I do not think preventing them from the SCS will do much to trigger an armed conflict.


You mean Indo China Sea.


NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15820
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby NRao » 29 Jan 2017 20:11

deejay wrote:
NRao wrote:...

I do not think preventing them from the SCS will do much to trigger an armed conflict.


You mean Indo China Sea.


When I want to beat upon China, then it is SCS. When I want to talk of right of passage, it magically becomes the Indo-Pacific.

PratikDas
BRFite
Posts: 1814
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 07:46
Contact:

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby PratikDas » 31 Jan 2017 04:47



The article linked within: Most powerful nuclear mortar, ‘Tulip,’ back in service
The shrapnel cluster from munitions of the 2S4 ‘Tulipan’ mortar is able to hit an area the size of four football fields. One shot from this powerful mortar totally demolished its target, making it inaccessible to any other artillery pieces. A special shell has been created for this powerful self-propelled mine, one that contains a nuclear charge.
:shock:

brar_w
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5895
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby brar_w » 31 Jan 2017 07:57

Singha wrote:this is the CRAM - phalanx on a truck

Image

we need to look into using the AK630 which is already locally made with a suitable radar & EO system that can track low supersonic inbounds and do some closed loop guidance. perhaps the barak1 "STGR" can do it. russians have numerous such systems too


See THIS

and also the MHTK as the Kinetic SRM option (guided) -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9v6tVyf1TSI

Lockheed had a full program in place but the US Army went just for the interceptor and will compete both C2 and Radar. It is likely to be an IAMD-IBCS mated to an existing Sentinel (slated to get GaN AESA bump around 2021) or a Lockheed TPQ-53 AESA (Originally planned for the EAPS by Lockheed before the program was broken into parts and competed).

With the Iron Dome launcher dimensions you can pack 80 of these interceptors into one launcher, and with the mobile smaller launcher developed by the US Army (MML), it gets you 60 per for rapid fire. It is still semi-active because of the light weight but their next problem to solve will be to get an active seeker in there within the same SWaP-C footprint. A challenge given that the Interceptor weighs 2-3 Kg.

They've begun test firing the interceptor but guided shots at targets are still some time away -



Initially they wan't to field the MML, and mate it to the C2 and Radar and IOC with an anti cruise missile (saturation) capability leveraging Aim-9 as the weapon of choice. Next will be CRAM.

Lockheed had an even more ambitious plan - http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/04/lo ... s-for.html

Image

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 35358
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby SaiK » 01 Feb 2017 23:02

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/01/ai ... ining.html

what do you call this? friendly fire?

precise munitions i'd say. well targeted. pakistaniyat perhaps

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15820
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby NRao » 02 Feb 2017 11:24



NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15820
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby NRao » 04 Feb 2017 08:43

Troubling.

China Gains on the U.S. in the Artificial Intelligence Arms Race

Robert O. Work, the veteran defense official retained as deputy secretary by President Trump, calls them his “A.I. dudes.” The breezy moniker belies their serious task: The dudes have been a kitchen cabinet of sorts, and have advised Mr. Work as he has sought to reshape warfare by bringing artificial intelligence to the battlefield.

Last spring, he asked, “O.K., you guys are the smartest guys in A.I., right?”

No, the dudes told him, “the smartest guys are at Facebook and Google,” Mr. Work recalled in an interview.

Now, increasingly, they’re also in China. The United States no longer has a strategic monopoly on the technology, which is widely seen as the key factor in the next generation of warfare.

..............

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 33671
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby shiv » 04 Feb 2017 09:05

NRao wrote:Troubling.

China Gains on the U.S. in the Artificial Intelligence Arms Race

Robert O. Work, the veteran defense official retained as deputy secretary by President Trump, calls them his “A.I. dudes.” The breezy moniker belies their serious task: The dudes have been a kitchen cabinet of sorts, and have advised Mr. Work as he has sought to reshape warfare by bringing artificial intelligence to the battlefield.

Last spring, he asked, “O.K., you guys are the smartest guys in A.I., right?”

No, the dudes told him, “the smartest guys are at Facebook and Google,” Mr. Work recalled in an interview.

Now, increasingly, they’re also in China. The United States no longer has a strategic monopoly on the technology, which is widely seen as the key factor in the next generation of warfare.

..............


My reaction to this is "Duh"

The US moves fast in applying technology to weapons and for the last 40 years I have followed developments that have - year after year after year after year claimed that it will be a "game changer" and a "war winner"

I have a serious problem with this. Intelligent missiles will, as per the article, kill ships and other weapons. But what happens when the adversary has no ships, no aircraft and just men and guns? Too many wars have been won by men with weapons wiling to die.

From the stratosphere - there is little difference between humans and ants. If you make a weapon that kills all ants in an area - ants from surrounding areas will come in and fill up those spaces unless you kill and occupy the space yourself and are ready to keep on killing those who come in from outside to fill the space.

Somehow the idea of more and more and more expensive technological weapons seem hollow to me when countries like Iraq/Syria Pakistan and NoKo have figured out long ago that technology is no substitute for nuclear weapons shielding constant asymmetric guerilla war fought by men willing to be killed.

Somehow we are asked to see "civilization" as not dying in war, and as domination by technology. But that is nonsense. It is unsustainable and wars are not winnable when the end point of all war is the domination of a land area by some humans. And what those humans do is "civilization"

Neshant
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby Neshant » 04 Feb 2017 09:15



Those are all fake numbers my man.

China 260... times 10 maybe. They have to target Russia, US, UK, India.. etc.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 15820
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: International Military Discussion

Postby NRao » 04 Feb 2017 09:27

shiv wrote:


My reaction to this is "Duh"



It is how you define AI. Even the autocorrection in your editor is AI.

For one, I would not take guys like Ng lightly. For what it is worth he took on Google, single handedly I may add, and pretty much won. (He headed the Chinese effort for self driving cars and produced results in a very short time. Today China can compete wit Google in that area)(he used to be a prof at Stanford).

However, the reason I brought it up here is that India will face this onslaught. For sure. Not something I would file under "duh".

For sure, if I get a chance, I am coming out of retirement.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jayan Menon and 29 guests