REVIEW - Defence Review Asia

Transcription

REVIEW
ASIA
DEFENCE
JUNE 2007
VOLUME 1, NUMBER 4
MICA (P) 150/03/2007
Israeli Defence Industry
Armoured
Vehicle Upgrades
Asia’s Ballistic Missiles
Malaysian Chief of Air Force Interview
Sea GIRAFFE AMB, the champion radar system...
...in littoral environment
The Sea GIRAFFE AMB is state-of-the-art naval multi-function radar using outstanding
true 3D Agile Multi-Beam (AMB) technology. The system functions simultaneously for:
• automatic air surveillance and tracking, including track-on-jam,
• automatic surface surveillance and tracking,
• target identification and classification including hovering and moving helicopters,
• 360° mortar/rocket alert and weapon location,
• navigation support
• target indication to weapon systems for both anti-air and anti-surface engagements, and
• gunfire support including high-resolution splash spotting.
SAAB MICROWAVE SYSTEMS
www.saabgroup.com
Saab serves the global market with world-leading products, services and solutions ranging from military defence to civil security.
Saab has operations and employees on all continents and constantly develops, adopts and improves new technology to meet customers’ changing
needs.
CONTENTS
EDITORIAL
WORLD FOCUS ASIA
03 Comments & Questions
30 Asia News
FEATURES
31 Malaysia Takes Delivery
of new Su-30s
06 Armoured Vehicles
32 Tamil Air Force
11 Israeli Defence Industry
WORLD FOCUS
INDUSTRY & SYSTEMS
34 World News
36 MANPADS
37 Electromagnetic Gun Technology
18 Ballistic Missile Threats
CHINA DEFENCE
WATCH
ASIAN OUTLOOK
34 China’s Dongfeng-21
40 IMDEX 2007 Report
42 EDITORS BOOKSHELF
22 Indian Navy Submarine
Programme Update
25 India’s Missile Systems
28 Interview with Malaysian Air Chief
JUNE 2007
VOLUME 1, NUMBER 4
MICA (P) 150/03/2007
Editor
Ross Butler
Contributors
Dzirhan Mahadzir
Keith Jacobs
Jean-Michel Guhl ([email protected])
Miroslav Gyürösi
James C. O’Halloran
Nicholas Merrett
Robert Brooks
S.K. Park
Simon Watson
Leo M. van Westerhoven
Graphic Designer
Anne Robinson
Publisher
Ross Butler
Advertising Offices & Representation
Australia & Asia
Asian Press Group Pte Ltd
PO Box 88, Miranda, NSW 1490 Australia
Phone: + 61 2 9526 7188
Fax: + 61 2 9526 1779
Email: [email protected]
Europe
Diana Scogna
31 rue de Tlemcen
75020 Paris, France
Phone: + 33 1 4315 9829
Fax: + 33 1 4033 9930
Israel
Asa Talbar
Talbar Media
PO Box 57136
Tel Aviv, Israel 61570
Phone: + 972 3 562 9565
Fax: + 972 3 562 9567
Advertising Materials
Raymond Boey
Asian Press Group Block 729 #04-4280
Ang Mo Kio Avenue 6
Singapore 560729
Phone: + 65 6457 2340
Fax: + 65 6456 2700
Italy
GAME Srl
Via Caffaro 13/10
16125 Genoa, Italy
Phone: + 39 010 589752
Fax: + 39 010 562193
Printer
Sunrise Printing & Supplies Pte Ltd
Russia & CIS
Olga Korobkova
VK Co.
Giliarovskogo str., 1, app.8
Moscow 129090, Russia
Defence Review Asia
An Asian Press Group Pte Ltd Publication
Printed & Published in Singapore
Asian Press Group Pte Ltd
Head Office: Block 729 #04-4280
Ang Mo Kio Avenue 6
Singapore 560729
Registration: 200611219N
MICA (P) 150/03/2007
ISSN 1834-6928 Singapore
DEFENCE REVIEW ASIA
3
FLY YOUR FLAG
at
The Pacific 2008 International Maritime and
Naval Exposition will be a unique marketing,
promotional and networking forum.
Pacific 2008 will be a comprehensive
showcase of the latest developments in naval,
underwater and commercial maritime
technology.
Pacific 2008 will also feature a number of
timely and highly informative industry
conferences and seminars.
NAVAL DEFENCE
Pacific 2008 will be the most comprehensive
industry event of its type ever staged in the
Asia Pacific region and will provide a focused
and informed business environment.
Contact
Bob Wouda
Head of Sales Pacific 2008
Telephone: +61 (0)3 5282 0500
www.pacific2008.com.au
NAVIGATION SYSTEMS
WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY
“COMMENTS & QUESTIONS”
DEFENCE
REVIEW
ASIA
EDITORIAL
JUNE 2007
VOLUME 1, NUMBER 4
MICA (P) 150/03/2007
ASIA’S CREEPING ARMS RACE
This month’s delivery of the first Sukhoi Su-30MKM Flanker H aircraft to Malaysia’s
air force represents another step in the ongoing creeping arms race, which has
gripped Asia for over a decade.
Air and missile power is the area of greatest
investment. Malaysia, with 18 Su-30MKM and
another 18 intended, is a minor player, compared
to India which has commitments for 180 and likely
additional Su-30MKI, and China, which has in
service and committed orders for in excess of 400
Su-27SK/J-11A/B Flanker B, Su-30MKK/MKK2
Flanker G, Su-27SKM ‘digital’ Flanker B and
navalised Su-33/33UB Flanker D. Russia is also
actively marketing the Su-35BM enhanced Flanker E
in Beijing. Indonesia, currently flying four Flanker B/
G and waiting for delivery of further Flankers, would
like around 48 aircraft, Vietnam flies a squadron,
and Thailand remains in negotiations. For nations
not closely aligned with the US the Flanker is the
jet to have.
The Flanker invasion of Asia is the bow wave
of a much broader penetration by Russian
manufacturers, with regional sales and marketing
efforts encompassing a wide range of platforms and
guided weapons. Kilo class submarines with the
Novator 3M-54 Club series of cruise missiles are a
hot seller, which India and China are both buying.
India is now licence building the supersonic Yakhont
cruise missile as the PJ-10 Brahmos, and negotiating
to licence the R-172 anti-AWACS missile.
India will soon deploy the refurbished carrier
Gorshkov, equipped with navalised MiG-29K
Fulcrums. China is refurbishing the Varyag, which is
to deploy up to 48 Flanker D variants. The latter are
capable of carrying the massive supersonic Kh-41
Sunburn cruise missile, already equipping China’s
Sovremenny class DDGs.
China has now fielded several batteries of the S300PMU-1/PMU-2 SA-10/20 Grumble / Gargoyle or
‘Patriotski’ long range SAM system, and is claimed
to have funded development of the follow-on S400 Triumf or SA-21. India has acquired the Buk
M or SA-11 Gadfly series. Malaysia has canvassed
the Buk M1, Indonesia has publicly commented on
the S-300 series. China is claimed to be building
cloned 9K330 Tor or SA-15 Gauntlet point defence
SAMs, in parallel with indigenous derivatives of the
S-300PMU.
The influx of warships, fighter jets and air defence
weapons is accompanied by increasing buys of
Russian smart weapons, with the KAB-1500 and
KAB-500 electro-optical and laser guided bombs
finding multiple clients. The Kh-31P or AS-17
Krypton anti-radiation missile has been bought
by China, and the Kh-59 stand-off weapon is now
appearing on Asian Flankers. With smart digital
interfaces on the Su-30, Su-27SKM and Su-35BM,
operators can access the full gamut of Russian
smart weapons technology.
India and China are now committed to deploying
Il-78 Midas tankers and A-50 Mainstay derived
AWACS, with both to acquire advanced active
phased array systems in the A-50I and KJ-2000
systems.
We are now observing a strategic shift in Asia
greater in magnitude than the 1930s. South
Korea has reacted by acquiring the F-15K Strike
Eagle, soon followed by Singapore with the more
advanced F-15SG, and to be supplemented by new
G550 hosted AWACS. Japan has openly lobbied for
the new F-22A Raptor, considered the best fighterbomber in existence, eliciting ‘we would like them
too’ comments in South Korean editorials. The US is
to deploy much of its F-22A fleet to Pacific basing,
and is upgrading Guam extensively.
Australia, which has recently confirmed an intent
to retire its potent F-111 fleet in 2010, will soon
deploy the lacklustre F/A-18F Super Hornet, and
wait till after 2015 for the battlefield strike optimised
Joint Strike Fighter, the one nation going hard
against the trend. With the Canberra leadership
publicly trashing the F-22A, that Australian analysts
largely agree to be the fighter of choice, Australia
is undertaking a policy of capability downsizing
unseen since the 1930s.
What Canberra is yet to claim credit for is
unilaterally reversing the Asian arms race by
example. Q
Israeli Defence Industry
Armoured
Vehicle Upgrades
Asia’s Ballistic Missiles
Malaysian Chief of Air Force Interview
BY DR CARLO KOPP
DEFENCE REVIEW ASIA
5
ARMOURED VEHICLE UPGRADES
The Australian army ordered 59 M1A1s
Heavy armour upgrade programmes:
New focus on urban warfare
By Keith Jacobs
ore than a decade ago, US civilian analysts
were predicting the future of warfare would
focus on the built-up urban environment. US defence
planners, led by former-Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld, ignored the warnings and went
on to develop the Future Combat System (FCS) with
its conventional warfare focus. It took the war in Iraq
to change that. Armies are now scrambling to refocus equipment requirements and technologies on
the demand for urban warfare.
The proliferation of improved explosive devices
(IED) and a variety of other low-tech weapons in the
war in Iraq, and to a lesser degree in Afghanistan,
has led to a rethink on what is needed to protect
military vehicles built during the last three decades.
In the mid-80s until the end of the Cold War,
numerous upgrade programmes emerged: from
up-gunning to adding reactive armour plates to the
external hull and turret areas to protect vehicles
against a range of anti-vehicle threats. In most
M
6
DEFENCE REVIEW ASIA
cases, it was just an effort to keep early Cold War
generation vehicles viable on the battlefield for
another decade or two.
Fast forward a decade to the post-2003 occupation
of Iraq and it was demonstrably clear that US forces
were not prepared technically or with their hardware
to fight the war in Iraq without suffering undue
casualties. A whole range of technology-oriented
research and development projects have now been
spawned by the complexities of urban warfare that
were ignored in the decade before. The scale of
application, though, from heavy main battle tanks
(MBT) to supply trucks, is so small as to have no
broad impact on lowering casualty levels to date in
Iraq.
HEAVY ARMOUR
One lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan that flies in
the face of Rumsfeld’s edicts is that MBTs are still
essential for the battlefield - whether it be intense
urban or rough terrain, high mobility is still required.
There are three major issues western tank builders
and armies have faced in Afghanistan and Iraq,
which applies across most of the Middle East. The
first is environment and crew habitation.
The Canadian Forces in Afghanistan have certainly
learned this, having deployed both Leopard C2 (1A5 variant) MBT and LAV-III AIFV to the country. In
addition to direct fire support from the Leopard C2s
105mm L7 main gun, the tanks heft and traction are
equally significant because they can crumble lowlying brick walls by using front-mounted engineering
attachments like dozer blades, or even just their
own weight. This clears a path for other forces,
and allows the tanks to continue moving forward
and providing fire support. Leopard C2s have their
own deficiencies, however, namely heat inside the
enclosed vehicle. A retrofit project for the Canadian
vehicles to fix this problem has faced continuous
delays and challenges.
Following Operation Medusa in Afghanistan, the
Canadian Department of National Defence (DND)
released this statement: “The heavily protected
direct fire capability of a main battle tank is an
invaluable tool in the arsenal of any military. The
intensity of recent conflicts in Central Asia and the
Middle East has shown western militaries that tanks
provide protection that cannot be matched by more
lightly armoured wheeled vehicles.... [Canada’s
existing Leopard C2/1A5] tanks have also provided
the Canadian Forces (CF) with the capability to travel
to locations that would otherwise be inaccessible to
wheeled light armoured vehicles, including Taliban
defensive positions”. Canada has since deferred
procurement of planned the LAV III (Stryker) mobile
gun system (MGS) to replace its Leopard C2 vehicles
(and is moving to buy newer, surplus Leopards).
Even with its add-on MEXAS armour plates, the
seventies vintage Leopard C2s lack the all-around
protection provided in the latest MBTs like the
American M1 Abrams, German Leopard 2, and
Challenger 2 vehicles. Even the French Leclerc
faces the same protection issues (and like others,
has initiated an urban warfare upgrade). The M1A2
TUSK and Leopard 2A6M versions ignore singlewarhead anti-tank rockets, adding belly armour kits
to improve protection against IED land mines.
Germany took its own lessons direct from
Kosovo, more than a decade ago, and Krauss Maffei
Wegmann (KMW) demonstrated its Leopard Peace
Support Operations (PSO) vehicle at Eurosatory
2006. The demonstration vehicle is fitted with addon armour to the turret and hull (skirts), a dozer blade,
operated by the driver to remove road obstacles. A
remotely controlled weapon station is mounted on
the side of the turret, next to the loader’s position,
to effectively engage close-in targets under the
protection of the tanks armour. The demonstrator
was painted in an experimental, blotched urban
combat pattern probably intended to make aimed
ATGM and RPG fire more difficult, a tactic derived
from fighting in Afghanistan.
The US Army has been focused on the M1A2
System Enhancement Program (SEP), currently
the most advanced standard variant. The M1A2
SEP builds on the digitised M1A2 platform with
an improved armour package of third generation
steel-encased depleted uranium armour, a new
command and control system, second-generation
FLIR thermal sights that include a Commander’s
Independent Thermal Viewer (CITV) for “hunterkiller” operation, the Under Armour Auxiliary Power
Unit (UAAPU) and a Thermal Management System
(TMS - i.e. air conditioning for crew and electronics),
a tank-infantryman telephone on rear of vehicle,
enhanced electronics for colour maps and displays,
improved networked communications, high-density
computer memory, and a BAE Systems developed
drivers rear-view camera (DRVC) system. Northrop
Grumman also has a US$20 million contract for
‘more than’ 500 Eyesafe laser rangefinders to be
8
DEFENCE REVIEW ASIA
Canadian Leopard C2 Mine Plough in Afghanistan
Israeli up-armoured Nakpadon carrier
fitted to the fleet by late this year. The Australian
Army has ordered 59 M1A1 vehicles to be fitted with
the tank-infantryman telephone system of TUSK.
The new focus is now the M1 Tank Urban
Survival Kit (TUSK) upgrade, that includes a remote
MG system operated under-armour, a loader’s
armour gun shield, a tank-infantry phone, Abrams
reactive armour tiles, a remote thermal sight, and
a power distribution box, as well as other key
modifications that take many of the M1A1-SA
(Situation Awareness) modifications and add further
urban survival attributes. [See graphic] In August
last year, General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS)
announced a US$45 million contract to produce
and install 505 Tank Urban Survivability Kits (TUSK)
for Abrams main battle tanks supporting Operation
Iraqi Freedom.
France’s Leclerc Azur demonstrator vehicle takes
a less radical approach - it is less expensive and
more reminiscent of the US Army M1127 Stryker
LAV: extensive fitting of the “bar cage” along the
rear engine deck and vehicles sides, the fitting of
a new remote-controlled 7.62mm MG (allowing
all crew to remain under-armour), and new smoke
grenades. The British Army has added bar armour
to its Challenger and Warrior AIFV, with a weight
penalty of some 800-kilograms.
RUSSIAN AND CIS UPGRADES
M1A2 TUSK ugrade optionsM1A2 TUSK ugrade options
Leopard 2A6 PSO
T62
The Russians and Ukrainians have by no means
been idly standing by. The vast potential market for
Soviet-era armoured vehicles dominate in Africa and
some sectors of the Asian armies. They run from the
most elderly T-54/55 tanks to Nineties-produced T80/T-90 series vehicles. Kharkiv Morozov Machine
Building Design Bureau (KMDB) is still offering the
T-55AGM variant for modernising T-54/-55/-62 and
Chinese-built ZTZ-59-1 (Type 59-1) tanks, including
a new power pack (5TDFM multi-fuel supercharged
diesel) raising power-to-weight ratio from 6.1 to
17.7hp/ton, a six forward and three reverse gearbox,
increased cruising range from 290-320km to at least
320km and 500km on roads. Other enhancements
include refits with either a 125mm 2A46/2A46M
or 120-mm KBM2 (re-chambered 125) main gun,
passive protection and built-in ERA plates, optronic
countermeasure system, fire suppression system,
and an autoloader.
KMDB is also offering three primary T-72 upgrade
variants: T-7AG, T-72MP, and T-72-120 (KBM2
for standard NATO shells). The latter variant has
provision for 40 shells, with 22 in the autoloader.
The T-72AG variant has many common components
with the T-80U/Oplot MBT. Refitted with 1000hp
or 1,200hp 6TD-2 diesel engines, road max and
cruise speeds increase, fuel consumption drops
(218v245 g/Kw-h), new TKN-4S commanders sight
aids raise day target acquisition ranges from 2km
to 5km, and 400 to 700-metres at night (offsetting
a major Warsaw Pact v NATO disadvantage during
the Cold War), plus add-on armour and ERA plates.
The T-72AG was first shown at IDEX ’97. The
relatively similar T-72MP upgrades includes either
of the above diesel engines, but uses a SAVAN-15
gunner’s day sight (replacing the original TPD-K1),
and raises target detection out to 5,000-meters. All
the vehicles have higher gross vehicle weights: the
MP-variant increases from 41.5 to 45.5-tons, but
is offset by high hp, increased fuel efficiency, and
other mobility improvements.
Sensor systems improvements have been slower
to reach operational forces, but are very much the
wave of the future in defeating light, shoulder-fired
weapons and IEDs. Canadian Army 8x8 Coyote AIFV
that deployed to Afghanistan used a new acoustic
Ferret Small Arms Detection and Localization
(SADIS) system, developed by Macdonald Dettwiler
and Associates. The SADIS is linked with satellite
GPS and provides a ten-figure grid reference system
for the firing point within seconds of a hostile attack.
Its small, unobtrusive antenna sits on the turret
basket; the antenna includes a Goodrich Aerospace
AN/VVS-2 Laser Detection Set system (providing
reference to hostile ATGM and artillery firings). The
US Army has also ordered 50 prototypes of the
BNN Technologies Boomerang detection system
(originally a sniper detection system), for fitting to
M1114 Up-Armoured HMMWV (UAH) vehicles. The
Boomerang 2 system can detect the direction of the
hostile shooter to within 2.5-degrees - even while
at road speed. A follow-on Boomerang 3 system
should be ready for production by or during 2008.
Rafael in Israel has developed a comparable system
called Spotlite Mk.II.
Rafael, as consortium leader in conjunction
with IMI and IAI/Elta, developed the Trophy Active
Defense System (ADS), which was selected by
General Dynamics Land Systems Division for further
development for use by the US Army and Marines.
The system has completed hundreds of live tests
with the Israel Defense Forces and demonstrated
effective neutralisation of anti-tank rockets and
guided missiles, with high safety levels, insignificant
residual penetration and minimal collateral damage.
The system is presently in a full-scale engineering
phase for inclusion on Israeli Merkava Mk.4 MBT,
and was declared fully production-ready in late
April.
The Trophy active protection system creates a
hemispheric protected zone around the vehicle
where incoming threats are intercepted and defeated.
It has three elements providing threat detection and
tracking, launching and intercept functions. The
threat detection and warning subsystem consists of
several sensors, including flat-panel radars placed
Rafael
The Trophy active protection system creates a hemispheric protected zone around the vehicle
DEFENCE REVIEW ASIA
9
KMB is still offering the T-55AGM variant
at strategic locations around the protected vehicle
to provide full hemispherical coverage. Once an
incoming threat is detected, identified and verified,
the Countermeasure Assembly is opened, and the
countermeasure device positioned in the direction
where it can effectively intercept the threat. It is then
launched automatically into a ballistic trajectory to
intercept the incoming threat at a relatively long
distance. The system can engage several threats,
simultaneously, arriving from different directions,
and is effective on stationary or moving platforms
and against short and long-range (ATGM) threats.
Beginning in 2006, the US Army rejected the
Trophy system and awarded a development-todemonstration contract to Raytheon for the Active
Protection System (APS). US Army’s Major-General
Jeffrey A. Sorenson, and deputy acquisition
and systems manager, declared Trophy a “nonproduceable item” due to perceptions of it causing
collateral damage in close-in, urban environments.
If pundits of the future of urban warfare are correct,
future retrofits of ADS/APS systems will become
essential for effective urban fighting with MBT and
AIF vehicles.
10 DEFENCE REVIEW ASIA
PAST LESSONS
In Bosnia-Kosovo in the early 1990s resulted in a new
NATO emphasis on mine-countermeasures to patrol
hostile territory, where guerrilla forces operated. The
need for lightly armoured patrol vehicles eventually
resulted in such widely-produced vehicles as the
Cadillac Gage V-100/-150/-200 Commando series
and a range of similar vehicles in Western Europe
and South Africa (Dingo), eventually leading to
the HUMVEE (and its later up-armoured variant)
to replace heavier MBTs to fulfill such missions
as convoy security, escort, conduct search-anddestroy operations, and fighting in the towns.
Experiences from Iraq and Afghanistan against
well-armed, determined guerrilla forces armed with
a variety of RPG, mortars and IEDs has placed a
new emphasis on upgrading all armoured combat
vehicles, from light armoured 4x4 vehicles to MBT
types. Israeli forces fighting in Lebanon against
Hezbollah forces over the last decade resulted
in conversion of a large number of obsolescent
medium tanks (Chieftain, T-55) to armoured infantry
carriers (Nagmachon, Nakpadon). In the most
heavily defended areas, it was still necessary for
Merkava tanks to enter the urban environment.
Most non-Western Europeans, Japanese, US
and Canadian armies cannot easily discard their
obsolescent MBTs (largely for replacement cost
reasons), and thus the market remains vibrant for
retrofitting these vehicles. Pakistan has upgraded
several hundred tanks to the Al-Khalid (MBT-2000)
standard, and Bangladesh is seriously considering
the upgrade for about 150 Type 59-1/69-1 tanks.
The same story is common throughout the Middle
East and Asia.
There are at least 24 new medium armoured
infantry fighting vehicle (AIFV) designs aimed at
replacing fifties and sixties vehicles, not counting the
number of sub-specialised variants in development
or production. No longer can most of those older
vehicles (M-113, Marder, BTR-60/-70/-80, etc) be
upgraded, or economical to operate in expanded
missions. There are only a few MBTs in production in
Russia, Ukraine, Pakistan, North Korea and China.
Until the medium AIFV can effectively take over the
mission of the heavy armoured tank, the MBTs will
remain an essential component on the battlefield even in the era of asymmetrical warfare. Q
ISRAELI DEFENCE INDUSTRY
IDF implements war lessons into new
hardware, evolving tactics
By Tamir Eshel
uring the recent conflict fought between Israel
and the Hezbollah, known as the 2nd Lebanon
War, Israel successfully demonstrated some of the
new capabilities acquired by the Israel Air Force
(IAF), developed in the recent years. Ehud Olmert’s
government and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)
supreme command, led by Chief of Staff, (former
Air-Force commander) LTGEN Dan Halutz, suffered
much of the criticism for the poor conduct of the
war and its outcome, as reflected in the Winograd
committee interim report. While the war reflected
the poor readiness, following years of erosion of the
land forces’ reserve units and homeland defense
command, the Air Force demonstrated an impressive
performance, successfully fulfilling all its missions.
It was the result of painstaking investments, many
years of tactical development, continuous training
and buildup of a capable and powerful force
in possession of superb intelligence on the
enemy’s infrastructure.
Elbit Systems Elbit Systems
D
Realising that the days of conventional and ‘linear’
battles are over, Israel invested a growing part of
its defence procurement budget to modernise and
prepare its airpower to meet this change. According
to Israel’s current strategy, the air force will be
the most suitable element to deter and engage
such threats, seeking to establish ‘air dominance’
by maintaining persistence, reaching long-and
short distance targets and engaging these without
involving costly land-bound campaigns. The key
for the successful conduct of such conflict would
be for Israel to have the best possible intelligence
it can obtain. This is where the IDF has emphasized
its development and where it continues to evolve
after the war.
INTELLIGENCE –
PERSISTENT AND PREVAILING
Israel’s intelligence was credited with both
successes and failures during the 2nd Lebanon
War. As the basis of any military operation,
effective intelligence is highly critical for air power,
requiring focused targeting data for planning and
execution of effective air strikes. Such detailed
reports are derived from extensive collection and
continuous monitoring of specific targets. The
majority of Israel’s intelligence assets are based on
domestically developed products. As these systems
are specifically adapted for local requirements, they
create a unique force multiplier that should pave the
path for further successes.
Traditionally, the details of such intelligence
gathering systems are kept top secret, but since
such systems are priority items in the Israeli
defence budget, the Department of Defense is
promoting their export in an attempt to reduce its
own procurement costs. This results in a width and
depth of systems that can be challenged only by
the mighty United States. These include sensors
for imagery and signals collection, and
Elbit Systems' infantry dismounted C3 system, developed for the battalion combat team. The system is known as "Dominator"
DEFENCE REVIEW ASIA 11
Defense-Updtae
A future concept of a deployable HQ, part of the Tzayad 'digital army' program
information and communications systems, providing
fusion and processing of information into timely,
effective and detailed situational pictures aiming to
provide decision makers adequate early warning of
evolving threats.
Intelligence gathering systems developed in Israel
include the OFEQ and EROS series reconnaissance
satellites, developed by IAI, carrying E/O payloads
developed by El-Op. These satellites are capable
of providing high- resolution imagery at submetre quality. Two additional OFEQ satellites are
currently in the works, OFEQ 7 and OFEQ 8, which
will utilise the existing OFEQ platform. Satellites
provide excellent intelligence from remote distances
but lack persistence over specific targets – this
capability could be acquired only by the deployment
of satellite constellations, a future capability which
could be gained by deployment of short lived, lowcost nano-satellites. For the near term, the Israeli
MOD is considering IAI’s proposals for an advanced
recce satellite to be based on IAI/MBT’s common
bus that utilises an advanced multi-spectral payload
planned by Elbit System’s El-Op. IAI is currently
working on another satellite called TECSAR, which
is also based on IAI/MBT’s common bus. It is
scheduled for launch this year, mounting a spacebased Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) developed
by IAI/Elta. This satellite will extend the Israeli space
imaging capability across all visibility and weather
conditions, including day, night and adverse
weather.
Airborne cameras similar to space based
sensors are also installed in airborne pods, carried
by fighter aircraft such as the F-16s. The Condor
pod, developed by El-Op, enables users to collect
vital imagery from stand-off range. Podded SAR
payloads developed by Elta offer similar flexibility
for area surveillance in difficult weather conditions.
These payloads can be carried by fighters, special
mission aircraft and UAVs. Rafael has also developed
a unique recce pod designed for tactical missions.
Known as Reccelite, this tactical recce pod was used
for the first time in combat during last year’s conflict,
and provides rapid and flexible coverage of large
areas with high resolution imaging. To accelerate the
processing of recce data into actionable intelligence
and targeting data, the system is integrated with
Rafael’s ‘Golden Bay’ advanced reconnaissance
processing system, which employs advanced
geo-referencing and image processing algorithms
to rapidly convert the images obtained by the
Reccelite into actionable intelligence and targeting
information. A new capability fielded in recent
months is the central reconnaissance processing
centre (RICENT), deployed by IAI/Elta for the Israeli
MoD. The centre taps all imagery and other relevant
intelligence products, as soon as they become
available (including real-time), supporting the
national intelligence and command branches with
the most advanced image processing available.
Intelligence gathering is not limited to the visual
domain. Signal intelligence is provided by different
manned and unmanned platforms. The latest
RAFAEL
An F-16 carrying a Spice 2000 EO guided bomb
addition to the IAF’s arsenal of intelligence platforms
is the Shavit Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) platform,
utilising the latest modular multi-sensor system
architecture developed by IAI/Elta. The aircraft is
based on the Gulfstream V business jet, fitted with a
modular gondola payload. The aircraft provides onboard accommodation for several operators, but all
the gathered information is transmitted in real-time
to the ground-processing centre, where SIGINT data
is processed to create an electronic-order-of battle,
and fused into a ‘live’ situational picture, supporting
ongoing operations. Similar SIGINT and specifically
Communications Intelligence (COMINT) capabilities
are also provided by UAVs, as well as aerostats,
maintaining continuous coverage of specific
regions of interest. Unlike UAVs, the Gulfstream
V is equipped with aerial refueling capability and
can remain airborne for long periods. During the
recent conflict, the Shavit sustained continuous
missions for over 18 hours. In September 2006
Israel received the first of pair of Eitam aircraft,
Gulfstream 550 based platforms modified into an
Airborne Early Warning platform, fitted with IAI/Elta
new PHALCON radar. The IAF plans to operate
four such aircraft. Similar aircraft were selected
by Singapore to replace their E-2C AEW aircraft
currently in service. When fully geared with the four
radar modules, the new Eitam will be integrated into
Israel’s airspace control network, and could also be
operated independently, supporting air operations
far beyond the reach of Israel’s ground based early
warning and surveillance systems.
Tethered (aerostat-born) systems are also carrying
a range of payloads, offering persistent coverage
of sensitive areas. Aerostats have been used by
the Israel Defense Forces for many years. These
systems proved highly valuable during the ongoing
conflict with Lebanon and the Palestinians, as they
provide persistent surveillance and monitoring of
an area from a distance, without having to maintain
constant activity of air or land elements which can
alert the potential target.
Intelligence gathering systems support a long and
continuous process, producing a ‘situational picture’
providing the basis for strategic assessments, and
data for target sets that would be pursued if potential
conflict erupts. Yet, historical data is sometimes
meaningless, insufficient to support successful
strikes using precision weapons. This is where
fresh “targeting quality” intelligence comes into
play. Collecting such data are the missions of aerial
reconnaissance assets, operated by dedicated
platforms, as well as standard aircraft equipped
with adequate targeting and tactical recce systems.
Command and control systems and procedures
must also be operated in order to facilitate rapid
processing and execution of attacks. The yearslong conflict with the Palestinians required the air
force to develop ultra-fast links between intelligence
and targeting assets, command elements and the
“shooters”. Attacking ‘short living’ targets, that are
sometimes exposed for less than one minute, poses
an immense challenge for the air assets, which led to
the development of unique operational procedures,
assuming tight integration of all available assets
FROM SENSORS TO SHOOTERS
Transforming intelligence into actionable data calls
for different information processing – here, highly
accurate information about the shape, location
and specific condition of the target is imperative data which is translated into targeting commands
for specific platforms and guided weapons. Poststrike battle damage assessment is another facet of
tactical intelligence, ensuring the required effect has
been achieved.
Israel was the world leader in the development
of multi-sensor targeting pods - the Litening pod,
developed by Rafael, was the first to integrate
daylight and thermal imaging, geo-positioning and
inertial measuring, laser ranging and designation,
and target cueing systems in a single pod, enabling
fighter pilots, UAVs and ground forces to closely
cooperate on a common mission. Bad weather
should not hinder air operations, even when the
visibility of E/O sensors is limited by rain, dust or
fog. SAR systems are providing imaging capability
of a quality almost similar to that of 2nd generation
The IAI/Malat Heron I
FLIRs, regardless of the weather. Furthermore, SAR
systems can also employ inherent Ground Moving
Target Indication (GMTI) capabilities to track ground
movement. Most of the fire control radars mounted
on today’s fighter aircraft are equipped with SAR
modes. However, when used with mechanically
scanning radars, SAR modes cannot be employed
when air/air modes are operating, therefore exposing
the aircraft to enemy attack. IAI/Elta is offering a
radar-targeting pod (RTP) that is optimised for allweather attack missions.
Attack aircraft, and their weapons represent
only part of the task force designed to carry out
a mission. They must be supported by other
intelligence and electronic support elements,
and, when necessary, get target designation and
receive snapshots of the target in real-time, from
UAV pathfinders. When flying on extended ranges
or long- distant missions, air-refueling is required
and, when confronted with enemy defences, fighter
escorts and defence suppression elements are
employed to pave a safe passage for the strike
force. The whole “package” is kept together by a
sophisticated network of data-links, facilitating
fast, automated communications between the
platforms and systems and supplementing voice
communications. Data communications contributes
to a dramatic reduction in the vulnerability of enemy
eavesdropping and interference, as well as human
error. It is also stealthier and more secure, enabling
faster, more flexible management of airborne
assets.
MATURING UAV TECHNOLOGY
In recent years, Israeli designed UAVs are leading
most of the world’s largest UAV acquisition
programmes, including the Indian Air Force and
Army Medium Altitude, Long Endurance (MALE),
Australian Tactical UAV (TUAV) programme, the
British Watchkeeper and Turkish Air Force MALE
system. The IAF UAV fleet was used extensively
during the 2nd Lebanon War, including the IAI/Malat
Searcher II, Elbit System’s Hermes 450 (Ziq), and
newly acquired (Shoval), also from IAI/Malat.
During last summer’s conflict in Lebanon, Israel
employed unmanned systems at an unprecedented
scale, demonstrating once again their value in
modern, network centric warfare. According to
Defense News, the Israelis deployed UAVs in various
roles, including the support of early-warning and
rapid elimination of land-based missiles and multiple
rocket launchers, as part of the IDF’s Boost Phase
Launch Intercept (BPLI) capability. These systems
demonstrated excellent capability to detect, target
and destroy rocket launchers within 60 seconds of
their detection. UAVs were also used in support of
ground troops, providing situational pictures in realtime, for covert land forces, enabling small combat
Bental Industries, EADS
at low operational level, closer to the field. These
techniques were practiced with different levels
of success on ‘targeted killing’ of identified and
incriminated terrorist targets in the Gaza strip and
the pursuit of short range rockets in South Lebanon,
the latter, unfortunately only with limited success.
elements to achieve high impact damage while
maintaining low visibility.
The IAI/Heron, only recently delivered to the IAF
UAV squadrons, flew hundreds of hours in support
of combat operations during the 2006 Lebanon war.
Herons supported Israel’s air and ground operations
providing continuous round-the-clock persistent
intelligence and recce missions, deep inside enemy
airspace, covering vast areas over Lebanon and
Syria. The Heron MALE UAV system has been
developed by IAI / Malat, to carry out long range,
high-altitude reconnaissance and surveillance for
extended mission durations. The UAV is powered
by a 115 hp Rotax 914 engine and is designed to
operate on missions of over 40 hours at an altitude
of 30,000 feet. It can carry multiple payloads at a
total weight of 250kg. Heron is usually deployed with
multiple payloads, including EO/IR, maritime patrol
radar (MPR), different types of SAR/MTI, SIGINT,
COMINT, laser designator, communications relays
etc. Initially deployed with the Indian defence forces,
for high altitude land surveillance and maritime
patrol missions, the Heron has been acquired by
the Turkish, Israeli and French air forces for similar
applications.
Hermes 450 was selected by the Israeli, British
and Singaporean forces to provide Intelligence,
Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance
(ISTAR) services. These UAVs have been operational
for the past decade; during the Lebanon War, Hermes
450 UAVs were put to large-scale operational use,
for the first time, as a network-integrated system.
These platforms played a critical role in the hunt
of medium and long-range missiles, locating and
identifying illusive targets over difficult mountainous
areas throughout Lebanon. Hermes 450 has already
accumulated over 20,000 operational flight hours,
mostly in combat service with the IDF, where it is
used as the primary battlefield reconnaissance
platform. The UAV has two external hardpoints
for stores and external fuel that extends the UAV’s
mission endurance to 28 - 30 hours. By 2010 the
British forces are expected to field a derivative of the
Hermes, known as Thales WK450. Weighing around
450 kg on takeoff, it is capable of carrying up to 150 kg
of internal and external payloads. The Watchkeeper’s
Sensors will comprise the CoMPASS EO/IR payload,
to be supplied by El-Op, and the Thales I-MASTER
synthetic aperture radar. Other electronic surveillance
and communications equipment are also considered.
Both vehicles use the UEL AR-801010 rotary engine
with pusher propeller, delivering 52 hp at 8,000 rpm.
The engine delivers 1.6 kw of electricity to power all
avionics on board.
as “Tactical UAVs”, supporting the army brigades
as integral intelligence collection systems. The IDF
is also seeking to buy hundreds of Mini UAVs to
support the battalions and special units.
Eitan, the new turboprop powered version of the
Heron, will be the largest unmanned aerial vehicle
considered by Israel. Eitan made its maiden flight last
year and is expected to be inducted into service soon.
The IAF is considering this large platform for several
missions, including intelligence and surveillance,
missile defence, as well as being a ‘mothership’ for
other UAVs, providing communications uplink and
aerial refueling services.
According to Aviation Week, this unmanned
aircraft will be employed in autonomous, persistent
missions over ‘neutral’ or hostile areas. It will cruise
at high altitude, beyond the reach of conventional
enemy air defences. From such vantage points
it will be able to cover a large area with electronic
emitter-location systems capable of independently
detecting and geolocating emitters (a task that
requires the deployment of multiple airborne assets
to get a ‘fix’ on specific emitters). Other payloads
believed to be used with the new drone are versions
of electronically scanning radar developed by IAI/
Elta that provides high resolution ground or air
surveillance from long range. An advanced infrared
seeker will be capable of tracking missiles at their
boost phase, providing targeting data for interceptor
missiles deployed with airborne or ground based
assets. (This concept was proposed by Rafael as
part of their Moab BPLI system in the 1990s).
One of the programmes that evolved after the
recent conflict was the small UAV programme,
NEW GENERATIONS OF UAVS
Among the new systems considered for fielding with
the Israel Defense Forces in the near future are a
High Altitude, Long Endurance (HALE) strategic
UAV utilising the IAI/Malat Heron II platform, also
known as Eitan, and much smaller systems, known
Elbit Systems
Sklark II UAV from ELbit
seeking a tactical UAV system to support IDF
Land Forces Command Brigade Combat Teams.
This requirement is not unique to the IDF. In fact,
several armies have recognised the gap between
the demand for intelligence and support provided
by UAVs and their availability to support ground
operations. A tactical UAV operates as an organic
asset with the Brigade, will be able to move with the
forces, or at least keep up with forward deployed
combat support elements, flying forward from the
lead echelon, covering the brigade’s area of interest,
monitoring enemy activities over the entire area or
filling intelligence gaps prior to an operation.
Several Israeli systems are competing for a
planned IDF programme, as well as on the export
markets. Two of the most notable tactical UAVs
considered for the programme are the I-View
system, from IAI/Malat and Elbit Systems’ Skylark
II. A third system currently being considered is the
Mini-Falcon from Innocon.
I-View was developed as a family of tactical
UAVs, designed for operation as an organic asset at
Division level and below. The I-View 50 is particularly
suitable for the Brigade tactical level. IAI offers
three configurations of the system, designed for
different payload weights and mission performance
levels. All models use common systems and field
support. The launch customer of the I-View system
was Australia, which will get its first systems within
2- 3 years. I-View is currently competing on other
tactical UAV acquisition programmes including the
Israel Defense Forces Small UAV programme, which
calls for the deployment of tactical UAVs at brigade
level.
With maximum takeoff weight of 240 kg, I-View
250 is the smallest platform capable of deploying
high performance sensors such as the MOSP
electro-optical system and EL/M-2055D SAR
payload. The standard payload for this family,
however, is the POP-300 that can be mounted
on the ‘250 and 150 platforms, offering advanced
capabilities at much lower weight. The vehicle’s new
miniaturised avionics further contribute to weight
and space saving. The I-View 50 system is packed
into a rapidly deployed S-250 shelter, comprising
two aerial vehicles, ground support equipment,
launching rail and control station – all are mounted
on a single tactical vehicle. I-View 50 uses the new
MiniPOP, a compact day/night EO modular payload
system weighing 6 – 7 kg (depending on the sensor’s
configuration), fitted with daylight color zoom CCD,
thermal imager and a laser pointer.
Elbit Systems is offering its Skylark II Small UAV
system for the IDF tactical UAV programme. This
system is designed for flying covert missions at
low to medium altitude, in day, night, and under
low clouds, when other observations systems are
limited by poor visibility. Skylark II will be operable
at battalion level, performing day, night and adverse
weather observation, intelligence collection and
target marking. The drone is operated from a single
all-terrain vehicle. The system retains the compact
ground station and datalink of the Skylark Mini
UAV. It is equipped with the 8 inch Micro-Compass
payload carrying color CCD, 3rd generation (3-5
micron) thermal imager and laser illuminator or an
optional laser designator. The aerial vehicle has a
Gross Take Off Weight of 35 kg and a wingspan of
4.2 metres. It is powered by a new tandem electrical
motor, offering up to six- hour long missions at
ranges exceeding 50km.
The latest entry into the competition is Innocon’s
Mini Falcon. This platform has been developed at
Innocon for several years, and was selected by BAE
Systems for its proposal for a US Marine Corps
Pioneer successor. The gross takeoff weigh of the
Mini Falcon I is 80kg. (Its empty weight is 42kg). The
3.5 metre long (4.5m span) UAV is designed for a
maximum payload weight of 17 kg. At the maximum
payload configuration the Mini Falcon can fly a
three hour mission; however, if a smaller payload
is selected (such as Mini-POP or Mini-Compass)
mission endurance can be increased up to eight
hours, and its range up to 180 km. Mini Falcon is
proposed with a nose or belly mounted payload
configurations. Innocon, a small UAV specialist, is
expected to team with a larger Israeli company for
the IDF competition.
Mini-UAVs were among the tactical surprises of
the recent conflict in Lebanon. These small and lowcost systems demonstrated excellent performance,
were most adaptable to the user’s needs, and
operated in almost total silence, being virtually
invisible even in daylight. Furthermore, these UAVs
are the only platform capable of delivering imagery
‘below the clouds’ in weather conditions that hinder
the operation of larger UAVs that operate above the
clouds. The Israelis operated two types of miniUAVs, the Skylark I developed by Elbit Systems
and the Rafael Skylite B, developed and operated
by Rafael.
The Skylark miniature UAV is a manpacked system
designed for tactical close-range surveillance
and reconnaissance missions. It can be quickly
assembled before a mission and launched by hand.
Recovery is performed by a deep stall manoeuvre,
which lands the vehicle safely on a small inflatable
cushion, at a pre-designated point. The wings
and tail surfaces are constructed from lightweight
composites, with the fuselage tubular boom also
made of composites. The avionics and payload
systems are contained in a pod carried below the
boom. The Skylark is equipped with a daylight
stabilised CCD payload weighing about 0.5 kg or an
uncooled FLIR for night operation. In February 2004
Elbit Systems won an IDF Ground Forces Command
contract to supply the Skylark for evaluation and
testing as an organic UAV system, to be operated by
infantry units. In 2005 and 2006 the mini-UAV was
selected to equip several armed forces, including
Australia and Canada for operations in Afghanistan.
During the 2nd Lebanon war Skylark mini-UAVs
were operated by IDF units performing close-in
reconnaissance missions in support of the ground
forces, providing valuable real-time intelligence, due
to their low acoustic and visual signatures, Skylarks
were able to operate at very low altitude, practically
undetectable. More systems were delivered during
the war, to support more units.
Another mini-UAV which was used in combat for
the first time last year was Rafael’s Skylite B. Rafael’s
teams were dispatched to the Lebanese border
(only a few kilometres from the location where these
drones are produced…) flying some 50 missions in
support of IDF units. Since the systems were pooled
from the labs, they actually included the latest
advanced, automated imaging capabilities that could
be evaluated for the first time in operational use.
The mini drones were equipped with the Controp’s
advanced DSTAMP stabilised payloads, providing
excellent recce imaging, searching for targets in
suspected areas, and delivered up-to-date mapping
and panoramic views to support planning.
While Skylite B and Skylark have proven their
combat qualities, other systems are also offering
unique capabilities, competing for the IDF mini-UAV
programme. IAI/Malat’s BirdEye 400 is a “flying wing”
style unmanned aerial vehicle, weighing 5kg. This
platform is unique in its ability to carry the MicroPOP
payload under its belly, providing unobstructed
hemispherical coverage. This configuration enables
the aircraft more flexible manoeuvring while keeping
the target in sight and eliminating the image rotation
and disorientation experienced with nose-mounted
cameras. MicroPOP is one of the first stabilised
micro payloads designed specifically for mini UAVs.
This payload weighs only 1 kg but offers the common
stabilised mount and exchangeable electro-optical
payload as IAI’s larger POP designs. It has a four inch
diameter “ball”, which, at present, includes color
daylight x10 zoom uncooled thermal cameras with
8-12 micron 320x240 pixel detector and a narrow (7
deg) field of view (2 FOV feature is also optional).
A newcomer to the market is the Lightener,
developed by ITL Optronics. It may look similar to
Elbit System’s Skylark, but Lightener is based on
a completely different design, where the fuselage
housing the payload, a pusher propeller and the
2.5 meter span wing, is placed above the boom,
providing better protection during landing. In its
weight and dimensions, the Lightener is almost
identical to Elbit System’s Skylark, (5.5 kg weight,
and a slightly larger wing span). It is designed to
carry payloads of up to 1.2kg. A complete system
packed into a single backpack, including the ground
station and datalink, it weighs only 12 kg. The basic
version is equipped with Bental / TellFlight MicroBat
275, a stabilised payload offering an x10 optical
power zoom and weighing only 300 grams.
Tadiran Communications’ rugged PDA
provides an important tool for commanders,
when linked with tactical communications
systems such as this CNR-9000 HDR set’
supporting data rates of up to 125 kb/sec.
Anti-insurgency operations, particularly against
terrorist activity in Gaza, brought about the
development of unique capabilities by joining air,
ground and naval forces and intelligence elements
in task oriented command posts, demonstrating
an effective level of persistence through tailored
responses and countermeasures against evolving
threats and targets of opportunity.
By maintaining very short response rates (typical
“target life” in these conditions are measured in
minutes and seconds, considerably less than the
time of flight of most weapons), such operations
required the employment of special capabilities
and the establishment of unified command, control
and communications protocols, in addressing such
demanding requirements.
Based on the successful performance of IDF
Brigade Combat Teams during operations in Gaza
in 2004, the IDF land forces command pursued
the formation of more flexible Battalion Combat
Teams. These units are organised to operate as a
“Swiss Army Knife”, rapidly deploying advanced
weapon systems and technologies, and “plugging
in” combat and combat support elements
ranging from specially trained dogs to tanks and
helicopters, similar to Special Operations teams.
These combat formations are equipped with C4ISR
assets comparable to what is currently available at
brigade and division levels, providing it with greater
freedom of operation and autonomy. These assets
will be utilised to control smaller teams, operating
network-enabled dismounted warfighters, AFVs,
and precision engagement systems, including
snipers and helicopters; all will be tasked with
missions against time critical targets in complex
engagements. Such elements will be controlled
by forward command elements, where real-time
intelligence, live video feeds and a constantly
updated situational picture enable and empower
authorised commanders to take decisive actions in
real time. Lacking such a sophisticated situational
view, such decisions were previously taken at the
highest command level, a time consuming process
that often extended beyond the life span of the target
therefore missing many tactical opportunities.
Tadiran Communications.
REJUVENATION OF THE LAND FORCES
Among the basic elements already tested with
new units are infantry combat suites, comprising the
Tavor assault rifle, with an integrated sight camera,
wearable computer and Global Positioning System
(GPS) equipment and rugged Personal Digital
Assistants (PDA), which allow sharing images,
messaging, and automatic reporting that augment
warfighter situational awareness. Operations in
urban terrain and inside buildings also require new
wireless networking facilities, which have also been
demonstrated. These units have already tested
the first examples of the Elbit Systems’ Skylark
mini UAVs procured by the IDF as an experimental
integral recce system.
Pursuing time-critical targets is not only about
intelligence ‘hunters’ and precision strike ‘killers’
– much more depends on the integration of all
authoritative elements, people that rarely can be
available at the command posts for longer periods
of time. These systems are designed to improve
decision-making processes and performance,
particularly at the higher command levels. One
such system is a ‘compact command and control’
element designed for deployment at different levels,
connected to all types of intelligence systems and
effectors, and providing mission commanders with
the means to manage a situation, take decisions
and monitor their execution. These elements are
the foundations behind IAI’s Twister - net-centric
command and control system designed as a
scalable system to manage multiple missions
by joint forces at divisional level and higher. Codeveloped by IAI/Malat, IAI/MLM and NESS TSG,
the system can integrate airborne UAVs, airborne,
ground or mobile observation posts, air- and
ground-mobile, as well as maritime forces, to
perform complex synchronised missions. Twister
operators can tap into live imagery delivered from
imaging and electronic sensors, as well as radar,
air operations picture (AOP), as well as archived
data to deliver actionable intelligence. Utilising the
same net-centric connectivity, the commander can
dynamically allocate these resources to be shared
by all mission participants and target specific forces
and effectors.
In the past decade, airpower received highest
priority in Israel’s national defence plans. In contrast,
the role of land forces, particularly armor, artillery
combats engineering and, to some extent, regular
infantry, became markedly diminished. All remaining
funding was allocated to enhance only regular
units, which were increased in numbers, allocated
improved equipment, particularly to special forces,
considered an essential element in the transition
of the IDF from conventional force into an agile,
network-centric force more suitable to fight in an
asymmetric conflict environment. In contrast, most
of the IDF land forces reserves suffered continual
erosion of equipment and combat training. The
recent war reinstated the role of the land forces,
both regular and reserves, as a paramount element
in any future conflict. Q
BALLISTIC MISSILE THREATS
allistic missiles and cruise missiles are the most
rapidly growing category of offensive weapon in
Asia, in response to which we are seeing increased
planning for investment in defensive measures. The
recent announcement that Japan and Australia were
likely to participate in a feasibility study on ballistic
missile defences, and Japan’s overt pursuit of the
F-22A Raptor fighter for cruise missile defence, are
both indicators of a developing trend.
B
BALLISTIC AND CRUISE MISSILE THREATS
The biggest user of ballistic missiles in Asia is
China, followed by North Korea, India, and Pakistan.
The most numerous weapons are theatre oriented,
either Tactical Ballistic Missiles (TBM) or Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBM), with Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) operated by China
and being developed by India and North Korea.
China operates a wide range of weapons. Legacy
weapons include the DF-3/DF-3A (2800 km), DF-4
(4,750 km), and the DF-5/DF-5A (13,000 km). TBMs
include the M-7 (160 km), DF-11/M-11 (300 km), the
DF-15/M-9 (500 km), the primary IRBM and SLBM
is the DF-21/JL-1 series (1,800 km), supplemented
by the DF-25 (1,800 km). Modern ICBMs include the
developmental DF-31 and DF-41 series. There are
claims China is adapting the DF-21 with terminal
guidance as an anti-shipping weapon.
India’s capabilities are modest in comparison,
and include the Prithvi TBM in three variants, with
ranges between 150 and 350 km, and the navalised
Dhanush with 250 km class range, recently tested.
IRBM capability is provided by the Agni I (900 km)
and Agni II (1,800 km). The Agni III is a developmental ICBM derivative.
Pakistan has been very active in developing TBMs
and IRBMs, mostly based on Chinese and North
Korean technology. The indigenous Hatf 1 and 2
spans ranges between 100 and 280 km, the M-11
Shaheen, M-9 Shaheen I and the M-18 Shaheen II
are Chinese technology, and the Ghauri I is an IRBM
based on the Korean No-Dong.
The DPRK has been very active in developing
IRBM and ICBM technology, as part of its long
running strategy of extracting concessions by
WMD blackmail of regional powers. The regime has
also been a primary supplier to Iran, and partly to
Pakistan. The DPRK has three families of missiles,
based on the R-11/SS-1 Scud, the R-21/SS-N-5
Sark, and the R-27/SS-N-6 Serb. The Hwa-Song
5 and 6 are stretched Scud B/C/D TBMs, the No
Dong A IRBM a derivative of the Soviet R-21, and
the No Dong B the Soviet R-27. The Taepo Dong 1
and 2 are three stage ICBM growth variants of the
No Dong series, with the capability to reach the US
or Australia.
Cruise missiles are a more recent arrival in the
region, with weapons in this category operated
by China, India and Pakistan. While most regional
cruise missiles first appeared as anti-shipping
missile variants, many have dual use capability, and
Defending against
ballistic and cruise
missile threats
By Dr Carlo Kopp
Competitor to THAAD is
the IAI Arrow 2 ABM
some have specialised land attack variants.
By far the leading player in the cruise missile
game is China, which has had a long running indigenous development programme. The best-known
PLA weapon is the naval DH-10, modelled on the
BGM-109 Tomahawk series. The Tomahawk-like YJ62 series was initially produced as an anti-shipping
weapon, but is expected to appear in a specialised
land attack variant. Of major concern is that China
was party to the illegal acquisition of former Soviet
Kh-55SM Kent cruise missiles from the Ukraine, in
a joint operation with Iran, earlier this decade. The
Kh-55 provides range in the class of the AGM-86B/
C ALCM. Pakistan’s Babur is believed to exploit
Chinese technology.
India and China have both acquired the Russian
3M-54 Club / SS-N-27 Sizzler cruise missile, which
includes the 3M-14 land attack variant. India has
also licenced the supersonic Kh-61/3M-55 Yakhont
as the PJ-10 Brahmos.
DEFENDING AGAINST BALLISTIC MISSILES
AND CRUISE MISSILES
The best defensive strategy against all standoff
missiles, be they ballistic or cruise missile class
weapons, is to preemptively attack and destroy
the launch platform. This was true in 1944 when
the first V-1 and V-2 weapons were deployed and
remains true today – ‘killing the archer rather than
the arrow’.
India's Agni II missile with a range of 1,800kms
This is unfortunately easier said than done, and
counterforce air strikes against mobile missile
launchers have been bedevilled with targeting
problems since 1944 – the US Air Force effort
against Saddam’s Scud force in 1991 represents
the most recent example. With ballistic and cruise
missiles more recently deployed on submarines
and surface warships, the problem gains a further
dimension.
Ground based mobile launchers however represent the greatest difficulty, as these are highly mobile
and easily concealed. Users favour the ‘shoot and
scoot’ strategy, and tracking weapons post launch
leaves a very narrow time window to locate and kill
the launcher before it departs.
Interception of both cruise missiles and ballistic
missiles in flight is challenging, and it is an open
question as to which is the more difficult target.
Ballistic missiles are characteristically easy to
detect and track once launched, but their hypersonic terminal phase velocity represents a real problem
for defensive weapon systems. The problem is often
described as ‘hitting a bullet with another bullet’, and
the problem increases in difficulty as the range of
the missile and its terminal velocity increase. Killing
a Scud B is easier than killing an IRBM, and killing
an IRBM in turn is easier than killing an ICBM.
Three strategies are possible for interception of
ballistic missiles. Boost phase intercept sees the
slow moving and highly visible (exhaust plume)
missile attacked, midcourse phase intercept sees
the warhead, and if attached, final stage attacked at
the apex of its trajectory, and terminal phase intercept involves engagement of the warhead section
as it dives on the target.
Boost phase intercept is the easiest from a
detection, tracking and kinematic perspective.
The exhaust plume can be seen from orbit, and
hundreds of kilometres away in the air. The missile
is climbing at a supersonic speed, and early in the
boost phase, will have all of its stages attached
presenting a large radar target. The difficulty with
boost phase intercept is that the defending aircraft,
be it equipped with an interceptor missile or directed energy Weapon (DEW), must be near enough
to the launcher to effect a timely shot. Where the
missile user has good ‘anti-access’ capability, via
Surface to Air Missiles (SAM) and fighter aircraft,
this becomes a challenging problem. Much of the
justification for the design of the stealthy Northrop
B-2A Spirit bomber was the hunting of highly mobile
Soviet ICBM launchers.
Fighters equipped with interceptor missiles are
presented with a high risk environment in which
they must orbit for many hours awaiting unpredictable ballistic missile launches, either to effect a
boost phase shot, or to kill the launcher.
Mid course phase intercepts are arguably the
most challenging, from a detection and tracking
perspective, as the missile is at the peak of its trajectory, and having shed booster stages is a small and
cool radar target. Kinematically, mid course phase
intercepts are demanding in terms of altitude, even
if the missile’s speed is modest as it flies across the
top of the ballistic arc.
Terminal phase intercepts sees the delivery
vehicle produce a prominent ionisation trail and heat
signature, as ablative coatings evaporate during reentry. The ionisation plume provides a radar signature much larger than the vehicle itself, permitting
a tracking system to cue precisely to the position
of the warhead. The principal tracking challenge
is discrimination between the re-entry vehicle and
debris or countermeasures re-entering concurrently.
The latter proved a major issue for Patriot intercepts
of the Scud in 1991. Kinematics then become the
primary challenge for a defender’s missiles.
Cruise missile defence is conceptually simpler,
but technically no less difficult. This is because
cruise missiles are low signature targets, with small
radar cross-sections in most bands and mostly cool
exhausts – only supersonic cruise missiles have
an appreciable heat signature. Flying low altitude
terrain following profiles, cruise missiles are often
THAAD [Terminal High Altitude Area Defense] is capable
of intercepting short and medium range ballistic missiles
routed to take advantage of terrain to further effect
terrain masking, and hide the missile in the radar
shadow of valleys and hills. Radars with high power
aperture performance, usually in the X-band, are the
sensor of choice for hunting cruise missiles. While
in principle any air- to -air or surface- to air- missile
can be used for this purpose, in practice fusing
and seeker modifications are typically required to
provide a high kill probability.
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENCE SYSTEMS
At this point in time a number of systems are
deployed or in development to effect engagements
against ballistic missiles.
The technologically most advanced system at this
time is the Boeing/USAF YAL-1A Air Borne Laser
system, a two MegaWatt Chemical Oxygen Iodine
Laser (COIL) DEW carried by a modified Boeing
747-400F airframe. The weapon is being developed
to effect boost phase engagements against TBMs,
IRBMs and ICBMs from ranges of up to 400 km. The
US aim is to deploy a small fleet of these aircraft to
patrol the borders of rogue states, like the DPRK or
Iran, and destroy any ballistic missiles which might
be launched, resulting in their WMD payloads falling
back on the territory of origin.
The ABL is a challenging programme with
ambitious goals, as the turbulent and particle laden
atmosphere is a difficult propagation environment
for the 1.315 micron laser beam to penetrate over a
distance. The ABL uses a pilot beam laser to illuminate the target, and a Hartmann-Shack wavefront
sensor to generate beam wavefront distortions,
intended to compensate for atmospheric effects.
Problems encountered to date include the ‘firefly’
effect, where atmospheric dust particles floating in
the beam are partly vapourised, producing superheated gas plumes and further disturbing the propa-
gation environment. The programme is currently in
the development phase, with funding for production
systems contingent on the success of the development article.
The Air Launched Hit-to-Kill system is a less
ambitious proposal for a less capable boost phase
system, which involves equipping a late model F15C with the APG-63(V)3 phased array radar and a
derivative of the Patriot PAC-3 interceptor missile.
The Missile Defence Agency awarded a study
contract early in 2007.
There are no reports as yet of a Russian analogue
to this system, involving integration of the 9M96 E/
E2 missile with the Su-30/35 Flanker, although the
Novator R-172 with similar size and performance is
being integrated on the Su-35BM.
To date most investment has however been
put into terminal phase intercept weapons, some
of which provide a limited midcourse intercept
capability.
Russia is currently marketing two families of ABM
system, based on the S-300PMU/S-400 Grumble/
Gargoyle system, and the S-300V/VM Giant/Gladiator system. While both share their early origins during
the 1970s, they are unique missile systems with
different radars, missiles and guidance systems.
The S-300PMU-1/PMU-2 provide some ABM
capability akin to that in the early Patriot PAC-1
series, with variants of the 48N6 missile guided by
the L-band 64N6E Big Bird acquisition radar and
the X-band 30N6E Flap Lid engagement radar, the
latter an analogue to the US MPQ-53 Patriot radar.
With the transition to the newer S-400 variant, the
9M96E/E2 interceptor missiles were introduced,
and radar enhancements added, to provide an ABM
capability similar to the PAC-3. All weapons use
Track Via Missile (TVM) guidance similar to the Patriot series. The system has been actively marketed in
the ABM role.
The alternative is the Antey 2500 or S-300VM, an
enhanced PVO-SV S-300V system, armed with the
hypersonic 9M82 and 9M83 missiles, guided by the
9S19M Imbir / High Screen acquisition radar and
the 9S32M Grill Pan engagement radar. The missiles
use semi-active continuous wave homing, with
illuminators on each TEL. Unlike the S-300PMU/
S-400 series which evolved from killing aircraft to
an ABM, the S-300V was designed from the outset
as an ABM, to the extent that the specialised High
Screen ABM radar is used.
Both the S-300V and the S-300PMU-2/S-400 are
highly mobile weapon systems, equipped with radio
datalinks to connect battery elements.
The US competitor to the S-300PMU/S-400 and
S-300VM is the MIM-104 Patriot supported by
the MPQ-53 family of acquistion and engagement
radars. The Patriot MIM-104B PAC-1 with limited
ABM capability via warhead and fusing modifications was introduced during the late 1980s, and
used during the 1991 Gulf War with widely disputed
success. The further improved MIM-104C PAC-3
was also deployed during the 1991 conflict. It was
followed in 1994 by the MIM-104D PAC-2/GEM
(Guidance Enhanced Missile) system, later replaced
with the enhanced MIM-104E GEM+ system, with
further missile modifications.
The most recent variant is the PAC-3 variant,
in three consecutive configurations, the latest of
which includes the revised MPQ-65 radar and the
Lockheed Martin ERINT (Extended Range Interceptor) missile. The ERINT is a US analogue to the
Russian 9M96 series, a compact and agile missile
with Ka-band active seeker and thrusters.
The PAC-3 is to provide the lower and mid altitude
component of a layered defensive system, where the
upper coverage would be provided by the THAAD
(Theatre High Altitude Area Defense) system. The
THAAD employs the Raytheon Systems AN/TPY-2
X-band Ground-Based Radar (GBR), a 9.2m² phased
array with 25,344 solid-state X-band transmit and
receive modules and a cited range of up to 1,000
km. The THAAD missile is a two-stage design using
a Kinetic Kill Vehicle (KKV), equipped with a liquid
fuelled manoeuvring system and imaging thermal
seeker. A typical battery uses 9 M1075 Oshkosh
Truck Corporation Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck with Load Handling System (HEMTT-LHS)
as TELs and a single towed AN/TPY-2 radar.
The Israeli competitor to the THAAD is the Green
Pine / Arrow system. The Elta EL/M-2090 Green
Pine is a phased array acquisition and engagement
radar, which guides the two- stage IAI Arrow 2 ABM.
The hypersonic missile is equipped with an active
radar and infrared seeker.
The US Navy is the final big player in this market
with a planned two layered system built around the
SPY-1 Aegis radar, and two variants of the Standard
series missile. The NTW-TBMD (Navy Theater Wide
- Theater Ballistic Missile Defense) was to use the
RIM-156 Standard SM-2ER Block IV missile for
lower altitude engagements, and the Raytheon RIM161 Standard SM-3 for high altitude engagements.
With the cancellation of the RIM-156 capability
the system is now centred on the RIM-161, which
uses a new booster, and a LEAP (Lightweight ExoAtmospheric Projectile) infrared- guided terminal
vehicle.
CRUISE MISSILE DEFENCE SYSTEMS
The first dedicated cruise missile defence SAM
systems to enter service were variants of the Soviet
S-300PT and PM Grumble, equipped with the LEMZ
76N6 Clam Shell low altitude acquisition radar. These
systems employed towed semi-mobile 24 metre
40V6, 40V6M and 38 metre 40V6MD masts, both
for the 76N6 and the 30N6 Flap Lid engagement
radars, to permit shots against low flying targets to
ranges of tens of kilometres, elevation permitting.
This capability remains available for later variants of
the S-300PMU/S-400, including the 96L6 acquisition radar.
There are no Western equivalents to date comparable to the 40V6 series mast systems used with
these radars. A mast mounted MPQ-53/65 system
would be the nearest equivalent.
The US has only recently reacted to cruise missile
proliferation, with planning initially centred on the use
of the F-22A Raptor fighter and the MC2A surveillance aircraft, the latter equipped with the MP-RTIP
high power X-band phased array. With the cancellation of the MC2A under budgetary pressure, and
growing obsolescence of the legacy E-8C JSTARS
APY-3 radar, the US is now relying almost completely on the F-22A to provide cruise missile acquisition
and engagement.
Much of Japan’s recent interest in the F-22A
Raptor is a direct result of JASDF strategic analysis identifying the high exposure of Japan to cruise
missiles deployed by China. Q
INDIA FOCUS
xxxxxxxxxx
INS Shishumar 209 Class Type 1500
Indian navy update:
submarine programmes
The ex-Admiral Gorshkov being refitted at Severodvinsk Shipyard.
n the coming decade, Indian submarine
programmes, not unlike the Chinese efforts,
will assume a significantly greater role in defence
posture and importance within the navy. The
agreement with Russia for supply of two Project
971U (Akula-II) class nuclear attack submarines has
been somewhat overshadowed by the done deal
to acquire six Scorpéne (Project 75) diesel-attack
submarines. Almost out of sight in all this are the
advances made in the last year on the Advanced
Technology Vessel (ATV), which does not appear
likely to be commissioned (the first boat) in the same
year that the first Scorpéne will be commissioned.
India has its sights on a fleet two decades hence
and is taking major steps today to ensure these
goals are achieved.
A review of near-term modernisation programmes
on current submarines, agreements for new
submarines, and a review of future submarines
helps to grasp the extent of Delhi’s investment in
future fleet forces. India naval authorities have
already stated a plan to eventually raise a force of
30-32 SSGN/SS submarines, a formidable number
possessing the latest Western European and
Russian technologies.
I
By Keith Jacobs
MODERNISATION ACTIVITIES
KILO (PROJECT 877EKM) MODERNISATION
Upgrades have been ongoing at the Admiralty
Shipyard (St. Petersburg) since the class reached
its tenth year in service. The first contract with
Zvezdochka Machine-Building Enterprise was in
1997 to overhaul Sindhuvir (S-58), valued at US$80
million. Sindhuvir re-commissioned two years later,
and was followed by a contract with Admiralteyskiy
Vert (St. Petersburg) for overhaul of Sindhuraj (S57) and Sindhukesari (S-60), completed in 1991.
Sindhuratna (S-59) followed with a US$70 million
contract to the navy yard at Zvezdochka Shipyard
(Severodvinsk). These were mostly overhaul and refit
contracts and did not cover extensive modernisation
or provision for weapons changes.
A modernisation effort that included provisions
for weapons and fire control changes started this
decade with a contract, signed in 2002, to overhaul
Sindhugosh (S-55) at Severodvinsk that was
completed in late-2005. Upgrades to Sindhuvijay
(S-62) began with a US$93 million contract with
Zvezdochka Shipyard in June 2005, which is
expected to return to service in 2008. Indian sources
say Sindhushastra (S-65) was armed, from the
beginning, with imported 3M-54E Klub-S ASCM,
with four or five carried on any given war patrol. INS
Sindhugosh is now equipped to fire 3M-14E Klub
land-attack cruise missiles and has the USHUS
sonar package developed by NPOL (Naval Physical
Oceanographic Lab).
Unmodernised and refitted boats have the MGK400 (Shark Teeth/Shark Fin) and a MG-519 (Mouse
Roar) sonar: the former being an active/passive
medium frequency (MF) and the former an active
search high frequency (HF) system. The sonar and
FCS can track up to 12 targets simultaneously,
while MGK-400EM incorporates the MG-519EM
min-detection and tracking system. Refitted ships
are understood to have MGK-400EM, while INS
Sinhugosh has been fitted with an indigenous
Panchendriyasonar suite (USHUS sonar and new
fire control system). From INS Sindhuvir (S-58), the
subs were fitted with a quad 9M36 Strela-M (SA-N8) SR-SAM launcher, with a 6km range.
Most subs have a mixed torpedo load-out that
includes Type 53-65 anti-ship and TEST 71/76 ASW
torpedoes.
Operational rates have been low and delays in
overhauls have exacerbated this issue. One sub
GUY TOREMANS
xxxxxxxxxxxx
GUY TOREMANS
INDIA FOCUS
INS Sindhukirti Kilo Project 877EM Class
every two years is being returned to Russia for
weapons and sensor upgrades, which generally
includes: Torpedo tube modifications for Novator
Klub-S (3M 14E/SS-N-27) land-attack missile
(LACM). The system has a 220-km range (as the
anti-ship version/3M 14TE and 3M 14E or SS-N30B); inclusion of eight (8) KBM 9M 36 Strela-3 /
SA-N-8 SR-SAM; a new inertial navigation system to
compliment provision of LACM and improve overall
submarine navigation accuracy; and an engineering
and power plant overhaul and new Exhide Industries
batteries.
The ten submarines (except one or two always
in Russia) form the 11th and 12th Submarine
Squadrons, based at Vishakhapatnam and Mumbai
respectively.
allow one or more of the Klub missile versions to be
used by the subs but no progress has apparently
been achieved, possibly for cost reasons. The
first two German-built units will likely be retired
first, upon entry of the Scorpéne (Project 75) subs,
although the last two may be fitted to launch Klub
3M-54E, which would require interior modifications.
INS Shankul (S 47) was thought to be in the yards
for several years, beginning in 2000, which matches
rumors indicating it was fitted with a Thomson-CSF
TSM 2272 Eledone active/passive sonar suite.
Two diesel-attack submarines, INS Vela (S 40)
and INS Vagli (S 42) of the Project 641M (Foxtrot)
class are based at Vizag with the 8th Sub Squadron
and at Mumbai respectively, while decommissioned
INS Karanj was the trials ship for Pachendriya and
Rani sonar/radar systems until August 2003.
TYPE 209/1500 CLASS MODERNISATION
Ongoing upgrades chiefly concern periscope
modernisation on the four Shishumar (Type
209/1500) class submarines. This is understood to
involve fitting new Indian-designed (Naval Physical
and Oceanographic Lab; NPOL) tactical towed
array sonar system; replacement of Kollmorgen
Model 76 periscopes with Swiss Zeiss model; and
an engineering and power plant overhaul, plus new
batteries provided.
Thus far, only Shishumar (S 44) is confirmed to
have undergone a refit, which began at Mazagon
Dockyard in 1999. Inquiries have been made to
Howaldtswerke (HDW) regarding modifications to
NEW CONTRACTS
Two programmes are currently under active contract:
the Scorpene, under an October 2005 contract, and
estimated to be worth US$4.6 billion for six boats.
The second is the ATV programme, which has been
under DNSO authority since its development. Each
submarine is likely to cost US$1 billion. Recently
CNS Admiral Sureesh Mehta confirmed that some
aspects of the ATV programme are still several years
from being completed, though the first hull is at
Vishakapatnam Ship Building Center. Officially, the
first of class will be laid down under the 7th Five
Year Plan, with five or six units planned.
SCORPÉNE (PROJECT 75) SS
The first two are being built in France and the
remaining four in India at Mazagon Dockyard Ltd.
The contract provides options that could extend
the class up to twenty-four subs - but it is unlikely
that more than twelve will be built. Batch II (six)
are planned for initial funding in 2014-15, with
commissioning to begin 2020-21. Batch II could
fully replace the Kilo 877EKM and Type 209/1500
classes now in service. Included under a US$1.8
billion agreement, DCN and Thales Naval Systems
France are providing major technical assistance
that will continue throughout the MDL construction
period. Each submarine costs around US$300
million.
According to many Indian sources, the Module
d’Energie Sous-Marine Autonome (MESA) air
independent propulsion (AIP) system is included in
the Scorpéne design. Other incorporated aspects are
understood to be the use of the Shyena indigenous
designed torpedo developed by the Naval Scientific
Laboratory; inclusion of the sub-launched OJ-10
BrahMos anti-ship missile system; the Kelvin Hughes
variant I-band radar and EDO AR 900 ESM intercept
system; Sagem SMS optronic and APS periscope
equipment; the Thales Underwater System (TUS)
2233 sonar suite; various Bharat Electronics (BEL)
fitments, including its torpedo decoy system, and
the UDS International submarine tactical information
and command system (SUBTICS).
INDIA FOCUS
AKULA-I (SHCHUKA-B/PROJECT 971U) SSN
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY VESSEL (SSGN)
Construction began in 2002 on the first hull of a
future nuclear-powered guided missile (SSGN)
submarine at Vishakapatnam, with construction
assistance from MDL. Modular hull construction
is by Bechtel Larsen and Trubo and MDL. The
water-reactor nuclear power plant has been the
responsibility of Bhabha Atomic Research Center.
The power plant will be tested ashore by the Indira
Ghandi Center for Atomic Research.
Among the weapons to be included in the 6,500ton SSGN design are Sagarika TLAM, Novator
anti-3M 14TE and 3M 14E (SS-N-30B) and PJ-10
BrahMos SSM, a mix of Shyena and TEST 53.3-cm
torpedoes, with a maximum weapon load of 2022 weapons in various combinations of the above.
Sagarika TLAM may be housed in separate exterior
VLS silos (ala I-688 TLAM system).
The first submarine will now likely be commissioned
in 2011-12; Hull Two will likely be laid down in 2009
and commissioned in 2014, with the remaining three
to be commissioned between 2018 and 2024.
INS Sindhughosh Kilo Project 877EM Class
GUY TOREMANS
A five-year lease agreement was concluded in earlyFebruary, whereby India would be provided two
Project 971U class SSN submarines. The first year
- reportedly the Nerpa (K-152) - should be delivered
late this and a second unit delivered in 2008. Since
Nerpa is a Pacific-based unit, it is quite likely the
second submarine will be Samara (K-267) or the
uncompleted Kaban.
The Akula-I SSN is a very impressive SSN (far more
so than anything yet fielded by China). The subs are
a steel-hulled version of the more expensive Project
945 (Sierra) SSN but are still capable of a 450-meter
diving depth and have a 35-knot underwater speed.
The subs carry four 65- and four 53-cm torpedo
tubes, normally carrying SAET 60M or newer USET80 ASW, RKP-55 Granat (SS-N-21) LACM, 53-65K
anti-ship and V.111 Shkval (‘last ditch’) rocketassisted anti-ship torpedoes. It is not expected the
classes will be able to carry 83RN or 84RN (SS-N15/-16) ASW (SUBROC type) weapons. Its torpedo
load is 76 weapons! Endurance at-sea is 100-days,
with a 73 complement (33 officers).
The class carries a MGK-540 Skat (Shark Gill)
bow-mounted sonar suite and MGK-503 lowfrequency active/passive flank sonars. The stern
fin houses a massive low-frequency towed-array
system. An extensive ESM capability exists (but may
be scaled back before delivery) and programmable
MG-104 and MG-114 decoy systems are carried.
It is expected that both will be retained until
2012-13, and possibly retained for one or two years
beyond that date, as the first ATV SSGN is due to
be commissioned. The lease provisions call for a
US$350 million initial payment, with an annual lease
of US$70 million. The Russians for their part will be
responsible for maintenance and up-keep on the
two submarines.
The Indian Dhanush-N sea-launched ballistic
missile (SLBM) is under development, with a
reported 250-km range and is based on the landbased Prithvi SRBM. First test firing occurred on
29 March this year, from the missile destroyer INS
Rajput (D-51), using the modified stern area. It is
relevant to remember India leased a single Charlie I
class SSGN from Russia between 1988-91, to gain
experience in nuclear-power plant engineering and
other aspects of SSN operation. The SSGN clearly
influenced subsequent Indian design work, being
intended to provide several Dhanush-N SLBM silo
tubes in the boat, and will most closely resemble
Project 949A (Anety/Oscar II) SSGN. Fitting the
Dhanush-N may change the aft-of-sail profile to
appear more like the SSBN type.
FUTURE PROGRAMMES
India has deferred a late-90s requirement for two
new DSRV (Deep Submergence Rescue Vehicle)
ships, and opted to lease the former commercial
oilfield support vessel INS Nireekshak (A 15). India
is currently negotiating with the US to acquire two
Mystic DSRV rescue vessels, which could be adapted
to the Nireekshak after deck area for over-the-side
handling. The strategy is likely to be less expensive
than new ship acquisitions, which would likely involve
US$75 million per DSRV. Early next decade India
might do as Singapore has done, and order a new
ASR design for indigenous construction. Acquisition
of the commercially designed Nireekshak is a shortterm solution and a second vessel acquisition
requirement will likely emerge by 2012.
AMUR 950 OR OTHER SS DESIGN
A second production submarine series is planned
and approved for construction that is likely to be
based on the Russian Amur-series (950, 1650 or
1850 designs). Four years ago Russia offered an
elongated (6.3 metres) Amur-1650 variant suited
to carry the PJ-10 BrahMos SSM (and Klub-S/-N).
Moscow has also recently been pushing the Amur950, with its ten vertical missile launch cells aft of
the sail, and not unlike the I-688 Los Angeles class
SSN concept.
A decision to move in this direction is based on
providing a second production source (w/Scorpene),
both from a technical source and backup perspective
to both Scorpéne and DNO ATV efforts. Using
modular hull construction, the programme would
involve MDL (Mumbai) and Bechtel Larsen and Tubro
(Hazira) as prime contractors with final assembly at
Vishakapatnam Naval Dockyard (VND). A Request
for Information is likely next year, a Request for
Proposal by 2010, and final contract design likely by
2011, with first of class commissioning in 2013. This
would place the first sub commissioning right at the
time the Akula-I lease would end, when the first ATV
will be fitted out, and the final Scorpéne SS Batch I
would be in late stages of completion.
Whoever bids for the second submarine design
for indigenous construction will also have to comply
with the new Defence Procurement Procedures law
passed in 2006. This will likely also bring into the
competition several Western European shipbuilder
designs – but it is likely the Indians will continue
favoring a ‘dual source’ approach. Q
INDIA FOCUS
India’s Anti-Missile Defence System
India is developing a complete suite of air-defence missiles that will employ network centric technology
and will be able to engage all types of targets.
By James C. O’Halloran
I
ndia’s Defence Research and Development Organisation [DRDO] has developed technologies for missile
defence, which has laid down a solid foundation for the indigenous missile defence of India from its
local adversaries – such as Pakistan and China. The new missile system, known simply as “AXO” for the
exo-atmospheric interceptor, and “PAD” for the endo-atmospheric interceptor, is not part of India’s Integrated
Guided Missile Development Programme [IGMDP] and has no commonality with the Akash SAM.
When first released to the open press, the system
was reported as expected to be ready for Initial
Operational Capability [IOC] with India’s Armed
Forces during 2010. However, like most programmes
(especially those from DRDO), this has now been
delayed to 2012, and perhaps even beyond.
SYSTEMS GROWTH
Development commenced in 2002, although some
DRDO sources have suggested the year 2000 when
a US$1 billion budget was first allocated for the
system. During FY2005/06, the Indian government
provided ballistic missile funds, part of which was
made available for the new anti-missile system.
The new system will come in at least two parts
and possibly three.
Based on open press reporting and trial firings
observed during April 2005 through November
2006, the first part – the long-range, high altitude
missile for exo-atmospheric intercept – will be in
the same category as the Prithvi II missile, using the
Prithvi II as the booster section with an indigenously
developed all new dart for the front end.
The endo-atmospheric weapon is reported to be
similar to (and possibly based upon) the US Patriot,
but with a longer range. Some Indian sources have
reported that the range is twice that of the Patriot.
The dart used with this part of the system will be the
same as that mounted on the booster section of the
former Prithvi II for the exo-atmospheric weapon.
The third missile came to light during an interview
with Dr. Prahlada in January/February 2006, when
mention was made of the Astra air-to-air missile,
which is currently in development being used in
the surface-to-air role. This would indeed give the
final short-range layered defence required by India
necessary for the complete suite of systems, plus
a short-range defence for the AXO/PAD against
incoming targets that are on Suppression of Enemy
Air Defence [SEAD] missions.
A network of the following systems is necessary
to support the multi-layered defence required by
India, these include:1. Early warning sensors
2. Command Posts
3. Anti-missile and sea-based detection
4. Interceptor missiles
RADARS
The information released in early May 2007 has
confirmed that India is to acquire from Israel the EL/
M-2083 Aerostat radar, to detect and track hostile
low-flying aircraft, helicopters, spy drones and
missiles. Data gathered by the radar will be passed
via data links to the central air-defence command
and control centre, where it will be used to maintain
an extended comprehensive air situation picture.
The EL/M-2083 radar is a simpler version of the
EL/M-2080 Green Pine radars, which are currently
employed within India and have been used for the
INDIA FOCUS
exo-atmospheric firing trials of the AXO system in
November 2006. India purchased two Green Pine
radars, one in a fully operational format and the
other was constructed within India, with Indian
modifications that increased the detection range
from 500-600km and speed of the target from
3,000km/sec to 5,000m/sec, plus handling capability
of the radar.
The Thales/Raytheon multi-function, solid-state
Master-A 3D radar is to be used in the endoatmospheric firing tests, in June 2007. The MasterA has an instrumentation range for surveillance
of 300km and a tracking range of 370km. The
elevation coverage is 24,000m at 60 degrees. If as
claimed (that the June firing will be to intercept the
target at 30,000m), this will put not only the missile
to test, but also the radar working at its limits. It is
possible that like the Green Pine, India might have
modified at least one Master-A, and thus improved
in capabilities.
PEDIGREE
There has been speculation within the intelligence
community that the principle behind the complete
Indian layered defence might be based on the
Russian S-300V system. This has primarily come
about with the knowledge that India was at one
stage attempting to purchase the Antey-2500 from
the now Almaz/Antey Concern of Air Defence in
Moscow.
The Antey-2500 is the export variant of the S-300VM
multi-missile ABM system, which employs the
9M82 (NATO Giant) and the 9M83 (NATO Gladiator)
missiles. Similarities here are that the 9M82 and
the 9M83 employ the same dart (front end), with
the 9M82 having an added booster that allows the
missile higher altitude intercepts.
Other information coming from sources within
Russia, have suggested that India carried out
in depth studies of the S-300V system during
exploitation of those components, which were
quietly passed to India. This also included radars
and communications sub-systems.
An article published in Russia during 2002,
mentioned that should India acquire the Patriot
system from the US, then Russia would stop
supplying the source codes for the S-300V. This
study and exploitation apparently left the Indians
in no doubt that the S-300V (Antey-2500) could
not handle (engage) those weapons of the class
required by India.
It was therefore decided that development of
an indigenous system would go ahead in India,
although co-development in the future would not
be ruled out. A DRDO source has indicated that
all parts of the system, except the main radar and
the interceptor guidance package, were or will be
developed in India.
TRIALS
Developmental trials of the system are being carried
out in two phases:Phase 1 – is expected to be complete by 2009
and this involves the three tests of each of the endoand exo-atmospheric interceptors.
The November 2006 trial was the initial test of
the first phase, which began on 19 November
with a full non-interceptor firing, computer driven
dress rehearsal. A target missile (AD Target-03)
was launched from Launch Complex [LC] III at
the Integrated Test Range [ITR] in Chandipur at
09:55h. The missile-tracking operators tracked
the target from 3,000m and simulated the firing
of an interceptor, which was judged to have been
successful. The interceptor missile was launched
electronically, conforming to ground guidance
computation and identified in digital simulations and
HILS simulation according to DRDO.
On 27 November, a second target missile (AD
Target-02) was launched at 10:15h from LC III from
the ITR, and again the target was first identified
and tracking commenced at 3,000m altitude. The
Missile Command and Control [MCC] passed the
target assignment to the Launch Command and
Control [LCC], ground guidance computed the
initial azimuth, time of launch of the interceptor
and uploaded this data to the onboard computer.
The interceptor missile was launched from
Wheelers Island’s launch pad when the Target-02
was at Apogee (175 seconds after target launch
– at 94,000m altitude). The interceptor on-board
guidance package steered the interceptor towards
the target and the seeker acquired the target at
19,000m, followed by the second stage separation
and second stage motor ignition.
Interception of the target is reported to have
taken place at 50,000m altitude, with the terminal
guidance and control performing as planned.
Phase 2 – This is to include more tests, and will
also involve indigenously produced interceptors
with ranges beyond 100km. Phase 2 is expected to
end by 2012, when the system is due to go IOC with
the Indian Air Force.
The development of a layered defensive missile
suite of systems will require a strong and robust
command and control network, in order that the most
appropriate weapon which is available at any one
time can take on all targets. Therefore, it is essential
that the system can perform the following:1. Detection
2. Identification (IFF)
3. Timely readying of the system
4. Engagement of the target
In order to perform the above effectively, an antimissile-missile will need the following:1. Integration of missiles with radar
2. Target tracking systems
3. The ability to discriminate re-entry
vehicles from bogus warheads
4. Sub-systems for fire control
Analysis of the trials so far involved with the
development of the new anti-missile system
have also revealed some other interesting points,
namely:1. Reports suggesting that the Prithvi II firing trial
were important to validate the capability for the
interception of the Prithvi II. This data would then
be incorporated into future Prithvi surface-tosurface missiles for improved survivability.
2. There are a very small number of actual
hardware flight trials taking place before the system
can be handed over to the troops. This suggests
the ability by the Indian design and development
scientists to computer-generate flights with
sufficient accuracy to determine the full systems
capabilities.
3. Not so long ago, new systems in development
underwent many tens of flights, and sometimes
into the hundreds over extended periods (years),
prior to being considered operational. The cost
of these development flights, and the time taken
up on the ranges, added to the overall cost of
development for a new system by sometimes as
much as 30-40 percent.
LAUNCHERS
The India’s Navy and Air Force plan the system for
operational use. At lease since April 2001 the Indian
Navy has been planning for vertical launchers,
therefore presumably the system will be installed at
sea in something like the US Mk41 VLS system. It
is assessed that only the smaller endo-atmospheric
missile will be used in this way, primarily because of
the liquid propulsion of the Prithvi II missile. However, trials at sea of the Prithvi II (known as “Dhanush”)
are known to have taken place.
The Air Force’s version will most likely be based
on a cross-country, TATA truck – capable of carrying
three of the AXO missiles or six of the PAD type.
SATELLITE TARGETING
Information dated 6 December 2006 indicates that
the DRDO is currently working on the problem of
satellite targeting, the configuration and down-links
have yet to be finalised.
PASSIVE INTERCEPTION/ELECTRONIC
WARFARE
The Divya Drishti will most likely be deployed with
the land-based system in a series of four – one will
be allocated as the “master” with the remainder
three as “slaves”. The vehicles will most likely be
deployed in a tri-angulation pattern 60km apart and
linked with a secure data-link using a data bandwidth
of 33.6kbps.
The frequency coverage of the Divya Drishti
goes from 0.135–18GHz (HF, VHF, UHF and SHF).
Development of the system began in 2004. Q
INDIA FOCUS
INFORMATION
Weapon Type
AXO
High altitude, long-range ABM system
Radars
Target detection
range (km)
Target velocity
(m/sec)
MISSILE
Length (m)
Diameter (m)
Wing span (m)
Weight (kg)
Max. range (m)
Min. range (m)
Max. altitude (m)
Min. altitude (m)
Motor type
a. Solid
b. Liquid
Velocity (m/sec)
G load
Response time (sec)
Launch time (sec)
Guidance
Seeker
Warhead
Fusing
Kill probability (%)
with 2 x missiles
EL/M-2080
600
PAD
Medium altitude, long-range ABM/
ATBM and Air-Defence system
Master-A
300
ASTRA
Low altitude, short-range
point defence system
Unknown
100
5,000
5,000
Unknown
10-12
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
100,000+
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
3.57
0.17
3,000+
90,000
Unknown
Liquid boost with solid dart
3,000+
20,000 – 30,000
Unknown
Solid
2,040-2,720
5
30
50
Inertial, with mid-course command
guidance with data up links until
seeker lock-on
Active radar for terminal homing
Multiple hit-to-kill
Divert thrusters producing hit-to-kill
1,600
5
30
50
Inertial, with mid-course command
guidance with data up links until
seeker lock-on
Active radar for terminal homing
Multiple hit-to-kill
Divert thrusters producing hit-to-kill
99
99
154
80km head on 15 km tail
chase
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Solid
1,200
9
Unknown
Unknown
Inertial midcourse, with
data link updates and
active terminal homing
Unknown
15kg pre-fragmented
Radar proximity with
laser in future
Unknown
ASIA OUTLOOK
RMAF Chief Interview
24 May, Irkutsk, Russia.
Vladimir Karnozov attended the handing over ceremony of the RMAF Su-30s to the Malaysian Chief of The Royal Malaysian Air Force
[RMAF], Dato’ Sri Azizan bin Ariffin. Karnozov was cordially granted an exclusive interview with the CAF for Defence Review Asia.
Royal Malaysian Air Force Chief,
Dato' Sri Azizan bin Ariffin
the aircraft entered series production. I would like to
report to you that this cooperation effort has been
a success, and we feel quite sentimental about the
eventual outcome.
It is not just the purchase that is important to us;
it is the challenges that were faced by the RMAF
project team and the designers of the aircraft. It was
difficult and by no means easy, especially the integration work and the insertion of western systems into
a Russian platform. This project would not have
materialised without the cooperation and consistent
effort of all the parties involved in it. But at the end
of the day we see the aircraft flying. Today, we saw
the aircraft taxiing to the runway and taking off, we
saw how it performed in the air during its aerobatic
performance. I can say: the aircraft that has emerged
is something we expected. This is the kind of aircraft
the Royal Malaysian Air Force wants.
G
DO YOU THINK MILITARY INDUSTRIAL
COOPERATION BETWEEN MALAYSIA AND
RUSSIA WILL GO BEYOND THE COMPLETION OF THE SU-30MKM PROJECT?
It has always been a dream for any air force of the
world to procure and operate the most modern
weapons system for the defence of its country. Like
many other countries, Malaysia has been involved
with this on-going effort of procuring the latest
war fighting systems available elsewhere. We see
the Su-30MKM as one of those weapons systems
that are very versatile and very formidable. It is the
world’s best fourth generation fighter aircraft.
The Su-30MKM combines a Russian platform
with all the merits traditionally found in the Russian
aircraft, and European subsystems within it as well.
So, the Su-30MKM is a combination of Russian and
European systems, developed to meet the specific
requirements submitted by the RMAF. We feel very
confident that, whatever role we want this aircraft
to do, it will do it successfully. We are happy with
the outcome of the whole project. It has cost us a
lot of money. But certainly it is a well designed and
manufactured aircraft. We are proud to be one of
the owners of this superb aircraft, the Sukhoi-30,
able now to at least walk alongside Russia, India
and other countries that have got these aircraft in
their inventory.
Development of this aircraft has been a very
complex matter. There are a lot of challenges we
had to face - Malaysia, Russia and other international partners involved in this project. Eventually
For your information, Malaysia and Russia celebrated the 40th anniversary of our bilateral relationship
in April. This bilateral relationship, as far as military
industrial cooperation is concerned, has been very
good and has been growing every day. This can
be seen in the many products we have procured
or ordered from Russia. Russian products are very
competitive, matching our needs in all respects,
including that of combat performance versus cost.
On behalf of the Malaysian government and the
Royal Malaysian Air Force I would like to express
again our most sincere gratitude to the Russian
team behind the Su-30MKM project for their great
effort, for giving us this most versatile, reliable and
formidable fighter aircraft.
When cooperating on projects like this we learn
that we come from two different worlds that requires
understanding and constant patience. We learn to
respect each other’s limitations and capabilities. We
also learn that our cultures are different and we have
to foster more understanding between us to make
things happen.
With these new aircraft, more cooperation and
interaction is expected, especially in with activities
to support the operational capability of the aircraft.
In this respect, the follow-on support activities
require the utmost commitment and assurance to
ensure they are cost effective and operationally long
lasting. We are dependent on one another to ensure
ENERAL, WHAT IS YOUR ASSESSMENT
OF THE SU-30MKM ROLLOUT AND
FIRST PUBLIC FLIGHT?
the aircraft will keep on flying for many more years
to come. Hopefully, we will succeed, working in
association with Rosoboronexport and its friends.
HAS THE RMAF DONE SOME TRAINING OF
ITS FLIGHT AND GROUND CREWS FOR THIS
TYPE OF AIRCRAFT?
To prepare for the arrival of the Su-30MKM, we have
conducted the theoretical training in Russia. The
practical training will soon be done in Malaysia with
Russian pilots and technicians. With this activity we
intend to gain experience and utilise the aircraft to
its utmost performance. We sincerely hope that our
Russian friends will be completely transparent in
implementing their knowledge during the learning
phase.
According to Sukhoi’s data, the Su-30MKM has
an in-flight refueling range in excess of 4,300nm.
Does Malaysia really need a combat aircraft with
such a long range?
The Su-30MKM is a multirole combat aircraft,
meaning the aircraft can perform air defence as well
as ground attack. For a small country like Malaysia we need this kind of capability. We cannot be
spending separately on air defence aircraft and
ground attack aircraft. It is very costly.
The purpose of acquiring this aircraft is tactical
as well as strategic. Strategic in that Malaysia is a
small country and we want to build a formidable
deterrence factor. At the same time we want to
have the reach. Being a maritime country we have
a lot of maritime areas and air space to cover. With
this Sukhoi-30 capability we will be able to defend
a much wider scope and area of the country. But,
basically, it is for the deterrence factor.
Malaysia already operates MiG-29 fighters. Will
the new Su-30MKMs replace them? How have the
MiGs been performing in terms of maintainability
and combat readiness?
Comparatively, both systems are okay. With the
Su-30MKM probably achieving full operational
readiness in 2008, the MiG-29 will still be serving
with the RMAF. The Sukhoi and the MiG have got
totally different capabilities. The MiG-29 is purely an
interceptor, it was designed for air defence purposes. It is still good for this role. We say that with our
experience maintaining the MiG-29 over the past
ten years. Our way forward will be with the Sukhoi30. We confidently expect the logistical support
on this aircraft will be better because of the many
experiences and lessons we have learnt in the past
with the Russian aircraft manufacturing industry.
ASIA OUTLOOK
RMAF Su-30MKM project team in company of RMAF Chief Dato Sri Azizan bin Ariffin
IS THERE STILL A POSSIBILITY FOR RMAF
TO REPLACE ITS F-18C/D HORNETS WITH
F/A-18E/F SUPER HORNETS?
We still consider this option. We are still subject to
budgets and everything else. The air force wants it,
but because of budget constraints we have got to
delay materialisation of it. But, as I said, this option
has still been left open.
COULD YOU PLEASE CLARIFY WHETHER
RMAF IS CONSIDERING THE SUPER
HORNET AS A REPLACEMENT FOR
THE CLASSIC HORNETS AFTER THEIR
OPERATIONAL LIVES EXPIRE, OR WOULD
YOU RATHER TAKE SUPER HORNETS
IN A TRADE-IN DEAL, RETURNING THE
HORNETS BACK TO MANUFACTURER WITH
SOME LIFE STILL IN THEM?
We would buy the Super Hornets if we had the
money. Keeping Hornets alive means we save the
money. We will buy Super Hornets. And of course
if the classic Hornets can be traded off, we can
increase the number of Super Hornets. If not, they
will stay alongside the Super Hornets.
ARE THERE ANY PLANS FOR NEXT GENERATION JET TRAINERS?
WHEN DO YOU WANT THE AIRBORNE EARLY
WARNING AIRCRAFT TO BE FIELDED?
There was a presentation of Yakovlev Yak-130s
made in Malaysia a couple of years ago. At that time
it was one of several aircraft being considered. But
we have decided to go for the Italian Aermacchi339 because of the legacy issue. We operated their
aircraft before and we were comfortable with it. And
the 339 well suits our needs of progressing fighter
pilots from the basics into the BAe Hawk, Sukhoi,
F/A-18 or MiG-29 systems.
Again, this is about budget. Personally I want it as
quickly as possible. We want it immediately, but we
cannot do that because of the budget. Funding is
always a factor.
WHAT IS RMAF’S MOST PRESSING
PRESENT NEED?
Yes, there is one, the need for air defence and
aerospace management. We have the sophistication of the Sukhoi, F/A-18 and MiG-29. We need a
system like the Airborne Early Warning Aircraft to
support and work in synergy with these very modern
and sophisticated fighters. This would then make
our defence very solid, providing a much stronger
deterrence.
WHICH AIRCRAFT TYPES ARE YOU LOOKING
AT? THERE ARE BIG PLATFORMS LIKE
A-50 OR E-3, AND THERE ARE SMALLER
WEDGETAIL OR HAWKEYE...
There are a couple of interesting options in the
market and we have not finalised our analysis
of the various aircraft. Once we have chosen a
suitable aircraft we will go to the government and
say: “We need this one!” And then we’ll be working
very closely with the government trying to budget
enough money to go forward. Probably in the next
two to three years we will do some planning. If we
book them soon, then we will pick them probably in
the next five, seven or ten years or so. It is a long
way off. But planning has always been there. The
need for airborne early warning cannot be exaggerated... and shall be aligned with the numbers of
fighters we are procuring in the future. Q
WORLD FOCUS
ASIA
Japan’s Itochu Corp. Fined over KC-767
The Japanese Defense Agency (JDA) has fined
Boeing Airplane Company partner, Itochu
Corporation, for failing to deliver the KC-767
AEW&C aircraft to the Air Self-Defense Force
(JASDF) on schedule, according to original
contract delivery date requirements.
The first aircraft was due to be handed-over
in late-February. An Itochu Corp. spokesman
advised the Ministry of Defence that delivery
would be delayed and could not be delivered
by 31 March. Delivery has still not taken place
at time of this writing. A Ministry statement says
it “will take a few more months.” Boeing is so
overwhelmed with commercial work it is now
two-years behind delivery schedule for the Italian
air force KC-767 aircraft. Italy placed orders for
four aircraft in December 2002, according to
Boeing vice-president for tanker programmes,
Mark McGraw. Flight testing continues. “We are
kind of working through that process with the
customer, and we’ll probably have some good
hard dates” before the Paris Air Show in June,
said McGraw, who refused to comment on the
Itochu Corp. fine, which can be levied on a daily
basis for delivery failure.
The issue could have serious repercussions
for Boeing’s KC-767 (and KC-777) offer to the
USAF for the forthcoming 15-year, US$40 billion
bid proposal to replace a significant portion of
the US Air Force’s KC-135 fleet of aerial refueling
aircraft. The decision – Boeing are bidding against
Northrop Grumman and EADS’s KC-30 offering
could come as early as late-July this year. Q
India-German Defence Pact
killed in World War I and II.
German engineering companies sold goods
worth 1.5 billion to India in 2005 with exports
to India having surged 137 per cent since 1999.
Germany is importing an increasing amount of
machinery from India, though German sales to
India play only a minor role in current Indian
defence procurements. Q
Indian Navy MiG-29KUB Flight
The Indian navy’s fist Mig-29KUB dual-seat trainer
aircraft flew for the first time 20 January this year
and demonstrated two days later at Zhukovsky air
test center to a mixed Russian and Indian audience.
The aircraft is the first of four KUB dual seat trainers. Twelve (12) Mig-29K aircraft are on order to be
Indian Defence Minister AK Anthony confirmed 3 May
before the Indian parliament that the government
has formally requested to (initially) acquire from the
US six Lockheed Martin C-130J transport aircraft.
A formal agreement will likely be signed between
the Indian Air Force and Lockheed Martin before
the end of 2007. The C-130J will be procured to
replace some of the ageing Antonov AN-32 “Sutlej”
twin engine transporters, mostly assigned to support
Indian special forces, including operations in highaltitude Kashmir and Assam states.
C-130Js are well suited to the hot-and-high flight
conditions found in the northern and southern parts
of India, and have excellent short-field performance
capabilities considered ideal for operations in remote
areas. USAF 143rd Airlift Wing recently completed
operations in Afghanistan. According to Col. Larry
Gallogly, “It was a totally different airplane [compared
to earlier versions]. Avionics are 70 percent different
and allowed 50 percent greater range. The integrated
precision radar allowed aircrews to make single-pass
landings on narrow, difficult landing grounds in both
Afghanistan and Iraq, he said. Q
JMSDF 19DD Programme
Japan Air Self-Defense Force
(JASDF), KC-767 Tanker
India and Germany have signed their first-ever
defence pact in Berlin. It provides for joint training, technology transfers and co-production of hitech military hardware. Defence Minister Pranab
Mukherjee was in Berlin to sign the agreement.
PM Mukherjee discussed cooperation in the fight
against terrorism with his German counterpart.
PM Mukherjee became the first Indian Defence
Minister to visit the cemetery for Indian soldiers
India Requests C-130J
Super Hercules
delivered by late-2007 to 2009, with options on a
further 30 aircraft through 2015. Indian air force
pilots are carrier-flight training at NAS Pensacola,
Florida, amid warming US-Indian political relations
since 2005. Q
The new Japanese Maritime Self-Defense
Force (JMSDF) ‘19DD’ destroyer programme
has been approved under the FY2007
budget, involving the acquisition of four
destroyers through to 2010. The four ships
will replace the large Hatsuyuki class frigates
that entered service more than 20 years ago.
The FY2007 programme funds the first of
the class, estimated to cost about US$720
million per ship. The three remaining ships
will be ordered in 2008-10. Specifications
include a 4,900-ton standard displacement, Combined Gas Turbine/Gas Turbine
(COGAG) propulsion (based on General
Electric LM 2500 gas turbines), VLS missile
launch system (likely to include Evolved Sea
Sparrow Missile), a BAE Systems Mk.45
Mod.4 5-inch main gun, 20-mm Phalanx
CIWS, and Japanese-designed Type 90 antiship missile system. JMSDF announced last
year it would be reducing its naval surface
fleet from 52 to 48, as part of broad defence
budget cuts while placing a new emphasis
on land- and seaborne anti-tactical ballistic
missile capabilities for the country. Q
WORLD FOCUS
ASIA
Malaysia takes delivery
of Sukhoi fighters
By Vladimir Karnozov / Irkutsk and Moscow
RMAF Su-30MKM air landing after flight on 24 May in Irkutsk
n 24 May the Royal Malaysian Air Force
delegation, headed by RMAF Commander
Dato’ Sri Azizan bin Ariffin, accepted two Sukhoi
Su-30MKM multirole fighters in a ceremony at the
Irkutsk Aviation Plant (IAZ) aerodrome, at the main
production site of Irkut Corporation.
Malaysia awarded Russian arms vendor
Rosoboronexport a firm order for 18 Su-30MKMs
in May 2003 in a contract worth $910 million. The
first two aircraft shall be dispatched to Malaysia in
a semi-disassembled form in an Antonov An-124
Ruslan heavy lifter this June. An additional four
aircraft will also be transported to RMAF bases by
An-124 this June and July. In October-November
six more shall be delivered, to make a total of 12
delivered for 2007. The remaining six Su-30MKM
will be delivered in the first half of 2008.
The Malaysian version of the Su-30MK is currently
the most advanced member in the Flanker series,
Aleksandr Barkovsky, Su-30MKI/MKA/MKM chief
designer and project manager, told Defence Review
Asia. “The Su-30MKM is a new step forward in
development of the Su-30”, Barkovsky said. The
Malaysian version is based on the Indian Su-30MKI,
which saw first delivery in 2002 and which has now
been in operation with the Indian Air Force for a few
years. The MKM (suffix for “Multirole, Commercial,
O
Malaysian) differs from MKI having a revised avionics
system, but keeping the airframe, UfaMPO-built
AL-31FP engines with thrust vectoring system and
fully digital flight control system (“fly-by-wire”). “The
Malaysian version has a few advanced technology
additions”, Barkovsky said. These include a
more sophisticated French-made friend-or-foe
interrogator (IFF) and an advanced warning system
using sensors from South African firm Avitronics
(visible in the lower part of the nose section, just
below the edge of the wing-fuselage extension). Su30MKM’s warning system now has more sensors
for detection of laser and infrared beams directed
onto the aircraft, and infrared and optical sensors
for detection of approaching missiles.
The Su-30MKM incorporates other new systems
including oxygen generation from Gai Severin’s
Zvezda company of Russia. It is the first use of such
system on production aircraft. The Indian version
had an oxygen supply system using pressurized air
vessels.
The share of Russian content is higher on the
MKM, on the account of Israeli and Indian made
items. The Su-30MKI has two central processing
units, one of which is Russian, working in the main
contour, and a second Indian one, in a back-up
contour; both CPUs are Russian manufactured.
Thales manufactured the wide-angle HUD. The
RMAF version is the same as the MKI, and comes
with a Russian/Ukrainian Sura helmet-mounted
target designator, but is an improved version.
The Su-30MKM comes equipped with French
pods: the LDP Damocles for laser target designator/
TV scanner, and Thales NAVFLIR forward-looking
infrared. Software changes have been confined to
a minimum, made just to address the difference in
the avionics set.
“In terms of combat efficiency, the MKM is similar
to the MKI”, Barkovsky said. The missile systems
are the same as the Indian versions and include
RVV-AE, R-27R1/ER1/T1/ET1 beyond-visual range
and R-73 short-range air-to-air, Kh-59ME, Kh-31A/
P, Kh-29TE/L air-to-surface weapons. Integration
of the MICA missile is still in consideration, “but so
far there have been only words about it”, the chief
designer confessed.
Both the Indian and Malaysian aircraft have an
airframe life of 6000 flight hours and 25 calendar
years. Heavy maintenance is required after 1500
flight hours or 10 years. The UMPO-built NPO Saturn
AL-31FP engines have a lifetime of 2000 hours
with overhaul due after 1000 hours. Deflectable jet
nozzles can operate for 500 hours before removal.
With official acceptance of two Su-30MKM the
RMAF becomes the second customer of Sukhoi
fighters equipped with thrust vectoring and
electronically scanned array (ESA) radars. The latter
is Tikhomirov’s NIIP N-011M Bars with a passive
antenna as opposed to the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
Block II’s active electronically scanned array (AESA)
on the AN/APG-79 radar.
Unlike ordinary mechanically scanned systems,
ESA/AESA radars enable shooting simultaneously
at four targets in a much wider body angle and can
employ stealthy methods of missile guidance without
the need for continuous illumination of targets with a
narrowed radar beam (for which the missile shall be
modified accordingly).
These qualities make ESA/AESA equipped aircraft
a more serious opponent than an older-technology
aircraft like the [Chinese] Su-30MKK/MK2 or
[Malaysian] F-18C/D Hornet, despite both being
armed with same RVV-AE, R-27, AIM-9 or AIM-120
beyond-visual range missiles.
The next customer in the queue for the Su-30MK
is Algeria, which awaits delivery of its first six Su30MKAs by the end of this year. Q
ASIA OUTLOOK
Vladimir Karnozov
The SLAF is in the process of acquiring MiG 29s.
By Keith Jacobs
Tamileelam Air Force and its Implications
T
he civil war in Sri Lanka resumed this year, largely the fault of both antagonists. On 26 March,
a rather unique event occurred when the relatively
new Tamileelam air force conducted a symbolic
attack on the Sri Lankan Air Force (SLAF) base
at Katunayake. Located 35km north of Colombo,
the attack by two Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
(LTTE) has broader implications than the minimal
damage caused against the SLAF.
The direct attack on Katunyake was conducted
by two Tamileelam Czech-built Zlin Z.143L two-seat
light aircraft and was conducted under the cover of
night, reportedly killing three SRLAF officers and
wounding 16 other personnel. A second attack was
also being claimed by Tamilnet radio, conducted 24
April against the army’s main base at Palali, on the
Jaffna peninsula. This attack apparently failed to
achieve any damage, according to media reporters
shown around the area shortly afterwards.
A week after the Palali attack, Colombo suburb
areas of Kolonnawa and Muththuraajawala were
attacked on a dark night raid, apparently aiming for
the government’s Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
(CPC) oil storage and LPG gas (Muththuraajawala)
facilities located a few kilometers from Katunayake Air
Zlin Z.143L cockpit
Base. More than any damage caused (which apparently was non-existent), it caused a power black out
around the Colombo area for several hours, while
army anti-aircraft gunners searched and occasionally
fired into the night sky at phantom targets.
The attack on Katunyake may have been timed
to destroy the first of the returning Mig-23M Flogger
fighter-bombers of the SLAF, after completing
overhauls in the Ukraine. The SLAF is also acquiring five Mig-29A Fulcrum fighter-interceptors from
Russia, and while their delivery dates are unknown,
it is not believed they were scheduled to arrive
prior to May this year. But there are other lucrative
SLAF targets at Katunyake as well - it is home to
No.10 Squadron’s Kfir C.2/C.7 and No. 5 Squadron
Chengdu F-7BS (Fishbed) fighters and several VIP
aircraft.
Maybe more than the individual aircraft present,
the air base headquarters for the SLAF has as much
symbolic value for the Tamil cause than any physical damage likely to have been achieved by the
bombing. The Army does have some anti-aircraft
guns, comprising about 24 40mm/L60 Bofors Mk.3,
several ZU-23-2 (23mm) and a few antiquated 94mm
(3.7-inch) medium (maybe non-op) anti-aircraft
guns. The former were apparently the source of the
post-attack racket in skies around Colombo.
ASIA OUTLOOK
HOW TO BUY AN AIR FORCE
How did the Tamil rebel organisation (LTTE) acquire
such aircraft? Rumors at the time indicated several different fixed-wing aircraft (misidentified) and
helicopter types, especially in the (increasingly
panicky) Indian press.
The aircraft were bought from a private South
African flying club. It is not clear how the aircraft,
if flown to Sri Lanka, arrived. An air delivery route is
fraught with problems and thus seaborne shipment
of dismantled aircraft was the only obvious solution.
Indian authorities knew of a total of five light commercial type aircraft to have been in LTTE control (not all
Zlin 143L aircraft).
Buying the aircraft and training the Tamil pilots
would have even been easier. LTTE has brokers
and supporters worldwide, willing to fund the training. Some Tamils have flight experience from the
Indian Air Force – others could have been trained
at any number of flight schools in South Africa
or elsewhere. Night flying – probably using IFR obviously presented problems for those conducting
the raids in so far as accuracy of identifying targets
was concerned. Eelam sources say their pilots are
(and were) trained in Pakistan.
The Zlin 143L (which is not the more advanced
LSi with a fuel injection system) is powered by a
235-hp Textron Lycoming 0-540-J3A5 propeller
engine, fitted with Bendix King Crown avionics with
autopilot, has IFR capabilities, and normally seats a
pilot and three passengers.
The aircraft fuel capacity is normally 61litres (two
16.1gal. tanks), and can add two 51-litre auxiliary
fuel tanks under the wings. Range, according to
Zlin manufacturers, at 50 percent power is 1,314km
(709nm) under normal conditions, or in utility configuration, which might be represented as a bombedup variant, at 570km (308nm).
The source of aviation-grade fuel is more intriguing but certainly is obtainable in southern India with
forged papers. The aircraft payload is normally
calculated as pilot-co-pilot at 200kg (441lbs), plus
two passengers (200kg), plus additional allowance
for up to 80kg for baggage. Under-wing pylons used
for auxiliary fuel tanks would have facilitated up to
100kg bombs as alternative load.
In the end, the seven-pilot or so air force has been
facilitated by a number of means, including worldwide Tamil financial support for the cause, Internet
locating aircraft for sale, and the lax customs issues
that facilitated shipment of aircraft from South Africa
to Sri Lanka.
IMPLICATIONS & SOLUTIONS
President Mahinda Rajapakse’s first response was
to put a strong security programme in place, but the
damage has been already been done. Airlines have
appealed and been granted permission to cease
operations at Kanunayake International Airport during
the night – just the sort of economic and psycho-
logical damage an insurgency group would desire.
Add to this a US$400-plus million decline in foreign
tourism and the economy takes a significant hit.
The SLAF has undertaken a number of punitive air
strikes into Eelam controlled territory, and typically
these cause a lot of collateral (civilian) damage in the
process – with no favourable results guaranteed.
It also appears the SLAF and Army is not well
prepared and may be ill advised in how to deal with
this new situation. The local newspaper – The Nation
– advised that the government should purchase
MiG-29 Fulcrum air superiority fighters (and apparently this process is already underway). The SLAF
Kfir C-2 and C-7 fighter-bombers would be better
suited, as neither the F.7BS (Fishbed) nor MIG-27M
radars are suited for low-altitude intercept missions
against a very low-return aircraft. The best alternative might be acquisition and conversion of Elta’s
EL/M-2032 airborne, multi-mode radar (ala Kfir C10 version) and its retrofit into existing Kfir aircraft.
What the SLAF really needs are three solutions:
acquisition of ground-based, low-cost air warning
radar for key areas of the country; acquisition of
a low-speed fighter or fighter-bomber aircraft (not
unlike the formerly-flown IA-58A Pucara); and acquisition of a tactical UAV system to find and monitor
likely airstrips used by the LTTE air wing.
In the first solution, the low-altitude threat is
what is paramount – comparable to the helicopter
threat and what solutions were devised for ground
forces for localised air defence. This solution lays
in the mobile AN/MPQ-49 Forward Area Alerting
Radar (FAAR) developed in the 1980s for detecting and providing identification to M-163 Vulcan
gun and Chaparral SAM systems, with a range of
about 20km. This particular system was retired in
1991 from the US Army and was replaced by moreadvanced AN/UPS-3 Tactical Defense Alert Radar
(TDAR). TDAR has about the same range (20km)
and was designed to provide advanced warning
for FIM-93 Stinger SAM and air-defense gun crews.
It is mobile and can be mounted on HMMWVs or
comparable ¾ ton trucks, or be pedestal mounted.
The AN/UPS-3 operates within the delta band of
the (military) radar spectrum and has a selectable
frequency range of 1.215 to 1.299 gigahertz (GHz),
which is displayed on the transceiver as frequencies
00 through 07. In 2000, the US Marine Corps awarded a sole source procurement contract with BAE
Systems (Santa Monica, CA) for various software
and engineering changes for existing systems.
Thus, TDAR can still be acquired and meets SLAF
threat warning requirements.
Second, a low-speed fighter aircraft is needed to
effect intercepts, both for day and night. While the
Argentine-built IA-58A Pucara has the right speed
capabilities, it lacks airborne radar and night-equipment for the mission (unless refitted with a small
diameter airborne radar). The IA-58A is also out
of production and less than thirty are active with
the Argentine air force. The aircraft flew for several
years with the SLAF but was eventually withdrawn
after AAA losses, maintenance difficulties, and
spares sourcing. However, several other light jet
trainer/attack aircraft (e.g. Hawk 200 series) could
fulfill the same role and need only be procured in
small numbers. Several of the SLAF’s Honddu
Karakorum-8 (K-8C) trainers, that were lost in the
2001 ground attack on Kanunayake, are not outfitted with airborne radar.
Sri Lanka’s Indra-2 air surveillance radars are of
little use in the hunt for low-and-slow, low signature
airborne targets and were off-line for maintenance
at the time of the 26 March air attack.
Third, a tactical UAV system is needed that can
provide both day and night aerial surveillance of likely
airstrip locations being used, and so that suitable air
strikes on those locations can be conducted.
As such, the aircraft purchase is overly expensive no manner what approach is taken. The better
solution is radar with TDAR or Elta Systems EL/M21-2106NG capabilities, combined with acquisition of a short-range air defence missile (SHORAD)
system that can be used against low-and-slow
airborne targets, and used in mobile or pedestal
mounts. The RBS-70 might be the best approach
as it is a beam rider that can be cured by the TDARtype radar until the missile reaches its target. Some
back-up shoulder-fired QW-2, SA-16/Ingal-M or
Mistral type sensor-driven SHORAD missile system
might also be acquired in small numbers.
Sri Lanka needs a broader approach, in coordination with its neighbours (in particular India) to
limit the ability of the LTTE to acquire such airborne
equipment. India has recently initiated purchase of
aerostats for just such threats – which could eventually also show up in Assam, Kashmir and other
insurgent areas if the success of the LTTE air wing
continues.
The Colombo-government also needs to improve
its potential to receive US anti-terrorism assistance.
The US, Canada and others have declared the LTTE
a worldwide terrorist organisation and via this declaration, surplus aid can be acquired at significantly
less cost than commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS)
systems. Q
CHINA WATCH
DONGFENG-21 WITH INFRARED SENSOR
By Keith Jacobs
C
hinese officials are now claiming its Dongfeng-21 [DF-21] will be fitted with infrared
sensors for detection and targeting of ships at sea. It has always remained an intriguing
concept, one researched by the Russians and eventually abandoned. Could the Chinese
have succeeded where the Russians failed?
DF-21_convoy
The 2-stage, solid-propellant Dongfeng-21 is
based on the naval Julang-1 [JL-1] (NATO: CSS-N3) submarine launched ballistic missile, and has a
range of 2,150km. The launch weight is on the order
of 15,200 kilograms. Western sources indicate two
basic versions – the first-generation DF-21, and
later the DF-21A (NATO: CSS-5/Mod.2). The DF-21
is credited with a 2,150km range with a single 600kg
nuclear-capable warhead. There are between 38
and 50 DF-21’s operationally deployed.
The DF-21A is credited with a 2,500km range with
a single 500kg nuclear-capable warhead, with 60
missile systems deployed. A nuclear warhead of
90kT or selectable 20, 90, 150kT, HE, chemical,
sub-munitions or EMP can be included. The landbased DF-21 is road mobile and uses a transportererector-launcher [TEL]. Late 1990s sources were
reporting several fixed, silo missile fields deployed
near Tonghua (near North Korea, targeting North
Asia), near Jianshui (North of Socialist Republic of
Vietnam’s [SRVs] border), at Datong (North-Central
China) and Liangxiwang (eastern China, opposite
Taiwan). All CSS-5 MRBM’s are under the control of
the Second Artillery Command.
The issue of targeting ships at sea with ballistic
missiles is an old one, fraught with problems. Infrared [IR] targeting requires some advanced knowledge of the position of warships. “While the use of
ballistic missiles against US naval vessels may seem
implausible, it forms part of China’s asymmetrical
military strategy, seeking to counter US strengths by
exploiting its vulnerabilities. Moreover, it is feasible,
as should be realised by the accuracies the United
States obtained from its Pershing II intermediaterange ballistic missile, equipped with a radar-guided
terminal seeker. To support its use of ballistic missiles
in conventional warfare, even against ships, China
has not only developed accurate ballistic missiles,
it is building reconnaissance satellites. These satellites include the Ziyuan-1 [ZY-1] and Ziyuan-2 [ZY-2]
earth resource satellites, believed to be for observing foreign military forces. The ZY-2, launched on
1 September 2000, is credited with a photographic
resolution of about nine feet. Other reconnaissance
satellites include the Haiyang-1 [HY-1] ocean colour
surveillance satellite expected to be launched by
June 2002, and its follow on, Haiyang-2 [HY-2].
Accurate ballistic missiles and the ability to observe
DF-21_launchtube
Dongfeng-21 range
US forces from space will give China the potential
ability to attack US ships at sea and in port. This
capability is being enhanced by China’s development of an integrated command and control system
called Qu Dian, which relies on its Feng Huo-1
military communications satellite launched on
January 26, 2000.” [Congressional Record, Remarks
on China, Honorable Bob Schaffer (CO), 14 March,
2002]
China targeting the super-carriers of the US Navy
is clearly a priority objective, but not exclusively.
Chinese military should be equally, if not more interested in targeting amphibious warfare strike groups.
Whilst the concentration of amphibious ships will
never again be like the images of World War II, they
remain a critical factor in any US contribution of
defending its official or unofficial alliance partners
in the Asia-Pacific Rim. Because of their generally
slower operating speeds, amphibious task groups
are more easily identified and targeted.
The problem for the Chinese will remain that of
advanced intelligence information before any ballistic missiles are launched, which is a major deficiency – even with the recent launching of a single radar
satellite, RORSAT. Q
WORLD FOCUS
NEWS
NATO Air Squadrons in Afghanistan
T
HE GERMAN Luftwaffe began Afghanistan
operations from Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan
in April this year. The German cabinet approved
the deployment on 7 February, for between six
and eight Tornado ECR. Fighter bomber wing
32 operating from Lechfeld would be tagged
for providing reconnaissance and intelligence
information to the International Security
Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, and
are not charged with a strike mission role. Six
aircraft of Aufklaerungsgeshwader 51 (AKG 51)
departed Schleswig-Jagel on 2 April on a flight
to Sardinia, Abu Dhabi (UAE) en-route to Mazare-Sharif air base, arriving 5 April. The Tornado
ECR include Telens reconnaissance pods fitted
with a long-range camera (LOROP) system in
the forward bay, with the mid-section housing a
pentelens (trilens) camera, and the rear-section
housing a infra-red line scan system. Bundestag
authorisation allows the aircraft to remain in
support of ISAF until 13 October.
RAF operations continued with a sevenplane detachment of mixed Harrier GR.7 and
GR.9A VSTOL aircraft from Kandahar air base,
with operations focused over the SE area of
Afghanistan. The seven Harrier GR.7s have
been there since October last year. The first
two Harrier GR.9 aircraft arrived on 23 January
this year. Q
German Air Force Tornado
SNIPER Pods Buys Continue
A
CCORDING to US Air Force
and Lockheed Martin officials at
the recent Air Warfare Symposium,
production of the AN/AAQ-33
SNIPER advanced targeting pods
(ATP) will continue into 2011, in
part from high demanding for their
use by deployed squadrons in
Southwest Asia. Currently deployed
F-15E and F-16C/D aircraft carry the
“non-traditional” ISR pods for strike
operations, which have returned a
96 percent mission-capable rate.
Lockheed Martin’s Mark Fischer,
programme manager, noted the
original Air Force order was only
enough to equip F-15E and some
F-16 squadrons. Many squadrons
deploying to SW Asia had insufficient
numbers of pods and had to ‘swap
out’ pods from returning aircraft for
next cycle aircraft. Foreign countries
ordering the pods include Norway,
Belgium, Poland and Oman – all for
their F-16s.
BAE Systems has adopted
the AAQ-33 ATP on the port
underfuselage weapons station to
Harrier GR.9A aircraft. Lockheed
Martin UK confirmed in February
the ATP adoption for Harrier GR.9
as part of the Urgent Operational
Requirement programmes, focused
on UK forces serving in Afghanistan.
Canada has also announced it will
equip its F/A-18A aircraft with
SNIPER pod. In February the air
force also began testing a B-1B
Lancer fitted with the pod attached
to a forward pylon. Q
Russia Sets
Modernisation Plans
ORMER Defence Minister Serge Ivanov stated earlier this
year, plans are underway to begin a massive modernisation
of Russia’s military forces, primarily using new founded revenues
from gas and oil discoveries. Target for completion of re-equipping
Russian military forces – including new ICBMs, the army’s ground
equipment, and new warship construction. Russia will spend some
US$200 billion. New acquisition will include 50 new RT-2PMU
Topol-M ICBM, 50 new bombers, and 31 new warships.
Plans for re-arming and equipping the army’s forces include 50
tank, 97 infantry, and 50 parachute battalions. Russia’s announced
2007 budget includes a 24 percent rise over 2006, estimated
at US$34 billion, or 16 percent of Russian federal spending.
Procurement portion of this budget rose over 20 percent, or
US$6.8 billion. One Akula SSN and one St. Petersburg class have
been modernised, along with several fast patrol vessels in recent
budgets; still delayed are completion of earlier projects, including
one Borey SSBN, one Yasen SSN, two Steregushchiy FFL (now set
to be completed), and one Skorpion PGM. Q
F
WORLD VIEW
SYSTEMS
Slovak Army use NATO compatible
IFF interrogators for MANPADS
By Miroslav Gyürösi
A
One particularly important application of
IFF systems is in the area of air defence, for
MANPADS, for which a development and
delivery subcontract was signed in June
2004. The prototype was created in December 2005 with the first 14 interrogator sets
(Lot 1) delivered by the manufacturer to the
Slovak Army in June 2006. All 14 sets have
been put into service with the Slovak Air
Defence Battery and Quick Reaction Battalion, both subordinate to the Light Brigade
from Topolcany.
The new Man-Portable Digital Interrogator
[MDI] hardware is a totally new design with
the adaptor kit developed by BAE Systems
and serially produced by LOT’s Aircraft
Repair Plant in Trencin (Slovakia). The
interrogator and complete folding antenna
are developed and produced by the BAE
Systems’ Communications, Navigation,
Identification & Reconnaissance Division
(now re-organised and renamed Electronics
& Integrated Solutions) from Wayne, United
States.
Mechanical interfaces and wiring are
produced by LOT, which also finalises the
assembly of the MDI sets. All components
of the MDI set are STANAG 4193 standard
compatible. Designers realised mechanical
interfaces and folding antennas were like
the autonomous units which are integrated
into the original 9P516 gripstick. The original
9P516 gripstick bottom has been removed
and replaced by a newly developed mechanical interface with outputs, loudspeaker and
antenna arm attachment. The colours of the
new parts are the same as the original colour
scheme of the 9P516 gripstick.
The MDI features sidelobe suppression
[SLS] and receiver sidelobe suppression
[RSLS] capabilities for superior accuracy
while using a small antenna. The design of
the MDI is completely solid state and with
digital processing. Working in Modes 1, 2,
3/A and C, the MDI is field upgradeable
to Mode 4 and Mode 5. The MDI consists
of receiver-transmitter, a video processor,
circuitry for timing and control, BIT, code
memory, power conditioning and battery.
All are packaged in a small, lightweight,
rugged, belt-mounted unit. Extensive use of
FPGA and MMIC technology achieves low
power and small size.
The MDI has a width of 172mm, height
218mm, a thickness of 96mm and the unit
weight is three kilograms. The transmitting frequency is 1030±0.2 MHz and Peak
Power Output is minimum 10W – the duty
cycle is up to one percent. Receiver centre
frequency is 1090±0.2 MHz and sensitivity
is minimum -68dBm. Width of field of view is
up to 20° and maximum range in interrogating mode is 12.8km with zero error in range.
The MDI operator control is the interface for
mode selection, initiation for challenges and
target identification. The target is identified
by sound and light signal. The security of the
systems code memory is protected through
predetermined code erase protocols.
All the MDI models comprise MDI, folding
IFF antenna, IFF antenna holder and its
adaptor, MDI connecting cable, CD with
SW for MDI codes insertion, codes insertion cable, battery charging source and MDI
service manual. For battery charging, use
115–220VAC with frequency 50–400 Hz. The
battery charger has output voltage of 28VDC
and maximum electric current 10A. Q
MDI_for_9K38
MiroslavGyurösi
fter joining NATO, the first step Slovakia took in the upgrade of its armed
forces inventory and organisation was the implementation of the new
NATO compatible IFF system. On 11 June 2003, Slovakia signed a five-year
contract with BAE Systems for such IFF applications which now provides
a discriminating system for every Slovak Air Force and Army platform, both
now in service and for new equipment being ordered.
WORLD VIEW
SYSTEMS
Evolution of the
electromagnetic gun
By Fred A. Haddock
RADM William E. Landay, Chief of Naval Research, speaking at the ceremony for the Electromagnetic Railgun
(EMRG) Launch Facility at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division (NSWCDD). US Navy
WORLD VIEW
SYSTEMS
MK 45 5-inch / 62-caliber (MOD 4 ERGM) gun
“
n the United States new ship programmes are
breaking ground in almost every aspect of ship
design and performance. This, in turn, is impacting
the direction that weapon technology is taking for
main guns. Ships like the DG (1000) (originally called
the DD (X)) are anticipated to be fitted with electromagnetic (EM) electric energy powered rail guns by
about 2020 that will launch guided missiles at higher
muzzle velocities than is achievable with chemical
energy guns, and without the huge peak acceleration that chemical energy imparts at fire initiation.
Rail gun development is also active in the UK, in
Europe and at the Australian National University in
Canberra that has carried out some experiments to
determine where the technology might be applied. If
successful EM technology will provide opportunities
to launch guided self-powered weapons to ranges
not currently achievable, in an asymmetric and littoral
warfare environment. “Clean” EM energy weapons
may also find a niche in space programmes.
The range of a gun-launched ballistic projectile
is determined by the amount of energy that can be
input to drive it, the mass of the projectile and the
length of the barrel. But increasing barrel length too
much will engender barrel droop and result in a less
rigid structure.
The same factors apply to an electric rail gun, but
the fact that the energy may be distributed along
the barrel, instead of just in the breach as is the
case with chemical energy propellants, provides the
opportunity for higher energy to be imparted as the
weapon is driven up the barrel, hence higher muzzle
velocity and longer range being achieved.
In the case of a projectile fitted with a chemical
energy sustainer motor, the initial thrust from the gun
materially assists the range of this class of weapon
as it allows the mass of the weapon to be reduced
as compared with missiles fired from conventional
zero length launchers that require large discarding
boost motors, or boost and sustainer combinations
that form part of the missile, to get them off the
launcher.
Other factors also favour the EM gun. There is
no requirement to store chemical energy propellant
cartridges in well-protected magazines, and there
is no burning propellant discharged as the missile
leaves the barrel. However, the generation, storage
and controlled discharge of electric energy are
I
presently complicating factors.
These problems are being tackled with the
emergence of all-electric ships using Integrated
Electric Power (IEP) for all ship services and propulsion that, apart from being more efficient, allows
better management of the ship’s power in a complex
operational environment. The DG (1000) will be the
first ship to be designed with better power management able to store large amounts of electrical energy,
with rapid recharge, for EM rail guns.
In response to the emerging complexities of
maritime asymmetric and littoral warfare, developments of guided missile and gun technologies to
Despite their attraction
there are significant
problems to be
solved to bring an EM
“rail gun” to maturity.
gun, being developed by BAE Systems (USA). This
Mod 4 ERGM gun includes modification of the Mk45
gun to handle, load and fire the EX-171 ERGM,
structural improvements to accommodate higher
firing energy (18 vs.10 Mega Joules), a new 62calibrer barrel, an Ammunition Recognition System,
a Gun/ERGM interface and a new control system
required by ERGM.
ERGM was scheduled to have an Initial Operational Capability in 2004, but this date was not achieved
as development costs have increased. Plans now
exist to give 50 US Navy Aegis-fitted cruisers and
destroyers an ERGM capability. Noteworthy, here,
is the selection by the RAN of the Mk45 gun for the
AWD, but it is not known whether it will be the ERGM
62 calibre or the standard Mk 45 54 calibre gun.
EM PROPULSION WEAPON LAUNCHERS
An electric rail gun is a linear DC motor that in its
simplest form consists of two parallel closely located
insulated, enclosed electricity conducting plates or
rails that form the “barrel”. As in the case of conventional guns there is a tradeoff between propelling
energy level and its controlled release, munition
mass and achievable launch velocity, hence range.
To demonstrate performance of such systems the
ANU, Canberra, in its experimental work on applications for EM propulsion, was able to accelerate a
16-gram projectile along a 5m-barrel with accelerations being measured of 250,000G’s and a muzzle
velocity of 5, 900m/sec. This experiment demonstrated the trade-off between mass and velocity.
The electric input energy required and its storage
method for this experiment is not known.
Another rail gun design, being developed in
Germany, uses coils of insulated wire that are
wrapped in the form of solenoids around a circular
barrel and spaced along its length, with the armature
centrally located in the barrel. By progressive and
very carefully timed successive energisation of the
solenoids the projectile is accelerated along the
barrel. Again, very large amounts of energy are
required to accelerate a realistic projectile to typically 3,000m/sec.
Despite their attraction there are significant
problems to be solved to bring an EM “rail gun”
to maturity. They include the storage of power,
the reliability of the power control circuits, reliability of the storage source in terms of its ability to
provide the specified energy release, the number of
discharges the storage system will provide without
failure and the recharge rate that determines the rate
of fire. The energy storage mechanism also needs
to be close to the gun to minimise resistive heating
of the conductive components of the system due
to the extremely large amounts of energy passing
through them.
Other problems to be solved in the design include
arcing of the armature causing deposits on the barrel
lining, due to the physical separation of it and the
conductive components, and frictional heat caused
“
provide longer range and more accurate delivery
of munitions are merging. This is where the EM rail
gun will offer a significant advantage as the inherent
dangers of chemical propellant magazine storage
are eliminated.
EX171 EXTENDED RANGE GUIDED MUNITION
Independent of electric rail gun development, the
EX-171 munition is being developed by Raytheon
to be fired from a modified chemical energy gun.
ERGM has a design range specification of approx
117km, that has not yet been demonstrated, and to
withstand up to a 10,000G accelerating force that
occurs at the moment of fire. As it emerges from
the barrel, the 43 kg missile deploys canard and tail
control aerodynamic cruciform wings and navigates
to the target by GPS/INS using pre-launch loaded
target GPS coordinates. There is no provision for inflight updates of the target’s GPS coordinates. An
anti- jam Y-code GPS receiver is able to use up to
12 GPS satellite outputs during flight and provide
a CEP (circular error probability) of about 6m. The
weapon is designed to dispense a range of sub
munitions that are released by proximity fuzing.
Raytheon is also the prime contractor for the US
Army’s and US Marine Corps’s Excalibur programme
for the development of a 155mm chemical energylaunched gun whose design provided the basis for
the development of ERGM.
MOD 4 ERGM GUN
ERGM development is combined with further development of the US Navy’s standard MK 45, 5 inch
(approx 127 mm) 54 calibre lightweight chemical
energy gun, to provide the Mod 4 ERGM 62 calibre
WORLD VIEW
demonstration of a 32MJ gun. Phase 2 is for the
completion of development of a compatible missile
by 2015 and for a sea demonstration of a 64MJ gun
in 2016, followed by production of 64MJ guns to be
installed on nominated ships during 2020 -2024.
The programme is subject to continued development being approved in the US FY09. ONR awarded
two competitive contracts mid-2006 for the further
development of EM rail-gun technology.
One is a US$9.6 million, 30- month contract to
General Atomics (GA) and its team members for the
Technology Development and Preliminary Design of
a half energy, 32-megajoule, demonstration launcher and construction and test of prototype hardware.
Notably, GA is involved in a number of naval
programmes to increase the application of EM
technology on naval ships. These include the
Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS),
Advanced Arresting Gear and the Superconducting DC Homopolar Motor for ship propulsion. GA is
“
by the assembly as it moves along the barrel. All
of these problems manifest themselves as waste
heat so there are proposals to cool EM guns with
liquid nitrogen pumped through the barrel, which in
itself is a complicating issue, but resolvable as in
the case of super-cooled homopolar DC motors for
ship propulsion.
On the plus side, a ship fitted with EM guns does
not need highly protected, large volume, chemical
energy explosive magazines and can thus store
more munitions and there is no muzzle flash or
exhaust plume when an electric gun is fired. Furthermore, the firing rate of an EM gun may be significantly higher than that of a chemical energy gun if
the energy storage device can be rapidly recharged
and the barrel adequately cooled.
The problems of an EM gun are also being
tackled by the adoption of a “hybrid” gun design
that uses conventional, chemical energy to provide
initial acceleration of the projectile, when overcoming projectile inertia demands large energy inputs,
followed by EM propulsion as the projectile accelerates along the gun barrel. Such a design optimizes
the use of chemical energy and requires less electrical energy than an “all-EM” gun.
STATUS OF EM RAIL GUN DEVELOPMENT
Under the US Navy’s Innovative Naval Prototype Rail
Gun programme the Office of Naval Research (ONR)
is managing a multi-phase programme planned to
culminate in the production of a 64 megajoule gun.
Phase 1, to be completed by end 2011, is for the
The DG (1000) will
be the first ship to be
designed with better power
management able to store
large amounts of electrical
energy for EM rail guns.
SYSTEMS
test the technologies and contractors’ designs for a
rail gun prototype.
In parallel with USN developments the US Army
has been developing its own version of a rail gun.
The Electric Armaments Research Center has
begun testing rail gun designs with a 52 MJ power
supply that comprises sixteen 3.25 MJ pulse
forming network (PFN) modules. The modules are
connected in parallel at the breech of the gun and
can be discharged simultaneously, sequentially or in
a combination of both.
The evolution of the EM rail gun is as significant
as the evolution from muzzle loading to breach
loading guns. It is evident that the USN will adopt
the technology and then improved using the now
well established “spiral development” (but not
cheap) process.
It is also evident that the Royal Australian Navy’s
AWD will be similarly developed to provide “future
proofing”, and it appears feasible that the last ship
of the currently planned three-ship force could be
fitted with an EM rail-gun to replace the Mk 45
conventional gun.
However, the adoption of EM gun technology will
be significantly dependent on what foundations such as the adoption of an Integrated Electric Power
(IEP) design - will be implemented from the outset
on the AWD, as future conversion to IEP and the
installation of an EM rail gun, as a modification, will
otherwise be prohibitively expensive. Q
“
DD(X) Advanced Gun System
also actively working with the US Army to apply EM
technology to US Army missions.
The other contract, awarded to BAE Systems, is
for the same programme as that awarded to GA and
is a US$9.3 million 30-month contract. At the same
time BAE Systems was awarded a separate US$5.4
million contract from Naval Special Warfare CenterDahlgren for the fabrication of the US Navy’s 32 MJ
Laboratory Launcher design enabling the Center to
IMDEX 2007
IMDEX turnout belies constricted
state of regional naval spend
By Dzirhan Mahadzir
RSS Steadfast
HMAS Farncomb
he International Maritime Defence Exhibition
(IMDEX) Asia 2007, held in Singapore in May,
while well attended, was devoid of any major
contract announcements or signings or any intense
marketing by the companies present towards fulfilling any regional navy requirements. This was not
surprising considering that most regional navies
have already committed to, or are in the process
of finalising their naval requirements, while those
countries with needs are financially or politically
constrained.
The organisers of IMDEX forecast that Asia and
Australasia would spend US$108 billion over the
next ten years to boost their navies, making the
region the number one market over this period. This
is in contrast to the projected naval spending of the
United States and Europe of US$105 billion and
US$99 billion respectively, in this same time frame.
The spending forecast for Asia and Australasia
was further broken down with US$29 billion projected for submarines, US$55 billion for anti-submarine
vessels and US$24 billion on other naval vessels.
These figures include on-going programmes and
contracts already awarded which arguably should
T
not be included in a market forecast on the basis
that such programmes are not up for tender or
competition anymore. The projections also include
countries whose programmes are limited to indigenous companies where the prospects of capturing
some of the market will depend upon the nationality of a company. This is clearly the case with both
China and Japan, whose naval programmes only
involve indigenous companies or a single specific
foreign country, namely Russia for China and the
United States for Japan.
The fact that the PLA Navy constitutes a potentially large market yet at the same time is a market
largely inaccessible due to arms and technology restrictions for western companies raises the
question as to whether the PLAN’s requirements
should be included as part of a potential industry
market forecast.
The Thai navy needs to replace some of its aging
surface warfare vessels, and also needs a new LPD
class vessel to replace its largely unoperational
carrier Chakri Naruebat, but it cannot formalise
these requirements until the current unstable political situation in Thailand resolves itself. Even if the
climate does settle, any naval requirements may be
superseded by the need to combat the insurgency
in Southern Thailand, where the situation deteriorates daily.
This is the case already in the Philippines, where
most funding has been directed towards building
army and air force capabilities to combat the numerous insurgencies plaguing the country despite the
relatively old age of much of the Philippine Navy
fleet, comprised of vessels commissioned during
the Second World War. The situation is exacerbated by the Philippines’ financial woes that severely
constricts defence funding.
Lack of funding also prevents Indonesia from
purchasing more surface vessels for its fleet, though
it does have four Sigma class corvettes, the first of
which will be handed over in July this year, on order
from the Netherlands. The Indonesian Navy seeks to
acquire 22 corvette sized vessels by 2024 for patrolling its extensive waters through local construction
by Indonesian shipbuilders PT PAL, which has
already built indigenous patrol craft for the Indonesian Navy and is now in the process of building two
LPD vessels. A deal has not yet concluded between
PT PAL and the Indonesian Defence Ministry in
regard to the Korvet Nasional (national corvette)
programme, though an initial order for two vessels,
with a projected cost of US$520 million, has been
agreed upon, according to Indonesian media
reports. Technical specifications about the vessels
are still sketchy, though it is known the vessels will
be 104m long with a 29.5kt maximum speed and a
4,500 nautical mile range. Indonesian officials have
stated that the vessels will have anti-air and antisubmarine warfare capabilities but have not specified what systems they would use.
Malaysia is currently negotiating with BAE
Systems over the purchase and construction of two
Batch II Lekiu class frigates, a follow-on order from
the two Lekiu class vessels currently in service. The
negotiations largely centre on the weapons systems
for the vessels, though neither BAE nor the Royal
Malaysian Navy would comment on the systems
being discussed. It is expected the negotiations on
the vessels will be completed by the end of this year
with the contract signed at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace show held in Malaysia in December. Both the vessels are to be built
IMDEX 2007
INS Mysore
in Malaysia at the Labuan Shipyards and Engineering facilities on Labuan Island, off the coast of East
Malaysia. The Malaysian government has reportedly insisted on a 40 percent workshare for LSE in the
construction of the vessels though such a requirement appears to be currently beyond LSE’s existing
capabilities. Although BAE is trying to rectify some
of the shortcomings by training up to 300 LSE
engineers in the United Kingdom and LSE recently
began purchasing additional equipment for its facilities in preparation for the frigates’ construction, it is
clear a significant part of the vessels will be built in
the UK and then transported to Labuan to be mated
with the parts constructed there.
A few Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) officers
have privately expressed concern over having the
frigates built locally given that LSE has never built a
ship of such size and complexity. The officers cite
the troubled OPV programme under the defunct
PSC Naval Dockyards that has only now been
brought on track by BN Shipyards, as an example
of the potential dangers of having an indigenous
shipbuilder with a lack of experience constructing a major warship. Not only was the programme
delayed but the first vessel failed its initial sea trials
and there are fears the same could occur with the
frigates. The two Lekiu class vessels in service were
also delayed by a year due to problems integrating the weapons systems. If such problems could
happen under an experienced company such as
BAE, the situation might be worse for a company
like LSE. BAE representatives however are optimistic the construction of the vessels will proceed
smoothly and are preparing to propose to Malaysia,
after negotiations on the Batch II vessels have been
completed, an upgrade of the two Lekius currently
in service to Batch II standards.
No resolution has been made yet on the fate of
the three Nakhoda Ragam class F2000 corvettes
built by BAE that Brunei refuses to accept delivery of. The matter still remains under arbitration
and BAE remains tightlipped on the matter. Most
analysts expect the ships will be sold to a third party
buyer if one can be found.
No further development has occurred in regard
to the potential requirement by Malaysia for up to
three multipurpose support vessels, an unsurprising situation since Malaysia has yet to formalise a
requirement for such ships. Various countries have
presented their designs to Malaysia in anticipation
of such a requirement though a recent decision by
the Malaysian government in late May to increase
the pay of the civil service, along with the Armed
Forces and police, will now make funding for such a
project even more difficult.
The Malaysian government is also expected to
make a decision later in the year regarding maintenance for the two Scorpéne class submarines that
will come into service in 2009. Both DCNS and
Navantia have submitted their proposals on the
matter. In the same period, Malaysian company
TRC Sinergy, which is responsible for constructing
the submarine base and facilities at Sepanggar Bay
naval base in East Malaysia, is expected to appoint
a foreign partner to assist its activities. Representatives of Navantia stated that TRC officials have
visited Navantia in Spain to assess the possibility of
having the Spanish company as its foreign partner.
Across the causeway, neighboring Singapore,
the host for IMDEX has steadily continued to develop the capabilities of the Republic of Singapore
Navy. The RSN’s six ship Formidable class frigate
programme has been on schedule with no controversy, a remarkable achievement given most new
design shipbuilding programmes around the world
run into delays and cost overruns. The first and
namesake of the class was commissioned on 5 May
this year, the same date as the RSN’s 40th anniversary. Three of the remaining vessels are undergoing sea trials with the last two under construction.
The last vessel is expected to be fully operational
by 2009.
The IMDEX show was also the launch platform for
DIMDEX 2008 (Doha International Maritime Defence
Exhibition 2008) which is a spin-off from IMDEX
targeting the Middle East-North African (MENA)
region. DIMDEX 2008, to be held in Doha, Qatar,
17-19 March 2008.
Mr Richard Loh, director of QMDI stated, “The
IMDEX Asia series, which is targeted at the Asia
Pacific region, has been highly successful. DIMDEX
2008 is a new launch by the organisers of IMDEX
Asia in response to industry requirements to expand
its maritime defence reach into the MENA region. It
will provide a focused and niche platform for industry to showcase their products and technologies in
the region”. Q
BOOKSHELF
Basrah, Baghdad, and Beyond, The US
Marine Corps in the Second Iraq War
Colonel (Dr.) Nicholas E. Reynolds (USMC, Ret)
(Naval Institute Press; ISBN 1-59144-717-4.
Pacific Victory, Tarawa to Okinawa 1943-1945,
by Derrick Wright (Sutton Publishing (UK), ISBN 0-7509-3746-7 hardcover)
While filled with Marine jargon and abbreviations,
this is the best history written of the Marines
during the 2003 Gulf War. Col. Reynolds was
OIC, Field History (1999-2004) for the Marines
and therefore had access to all the operational
and personal histories of marine units involved
in the war. Chapter Twelve of the book includes
analysis of a several key subjects (Marines
treatment of Iraqis, command observations and
its relationship to Information Warfare (IW), and
the formal lessons-of-war) that are well worth
the price of the book by themselves. The last
half the book comprises appendices, including the staff Summary of
Action, I MEF to support the units Presidential Unit Citation given postinvasion. A chronology, unit list, and Notes are valuable in their own
right. Included in observations where British and CPFLCC/US Army
operational doctrine concepts differed from 1st Marine Division urban
warfare concepts.
SUBSCRIBE
Asia has become one of the largest and most demanding defence
markets in the world. This complicated and demanding environment demands
a new type of regional defence magazine offering objective and unbiased
coverage of the defence issues that matter to the region. The magazine that
meets this critical requirement is Defence Review Asia.
Yes, please enter my subscription to Defence Review Asia for:
Asia: Q 1 Year US$80 (Inc Airmail Postage)
Singapore: Q
Q1 Year S$100 (Inc GST)
Rest of world: Q
Q1 Year US$120 (Inc Airmail Postage)
Please charge my: Q
QVisa Q
QMastercard Q
QAmex Card
DEFENCE
REVIEW
ASIA
The book is a broad perspective
of Central Pacific ground fighting
from the Tarawa to Okinawa
invasion. Each chapter provides
both orientation and detail maps,
details of both Allied and Japanese
command structure and orders-ofbattle, the various ‘Operation’s’ that
marked USN, USAF, and Marine
operations, and a day-by-day over
view of fighting during each of the
operations. As such, the 238-pages
offer a focus more on operations
and events than personal history
experiences. The author has written
three other fine volumes focused on
specific island assaults: To the Far Side
of Hell: The Battle for Peleliu, Tarawa:
A Hell of a Way to Die (both Crowood
Press) and The Battle for Iwo Jima (2003
MAY 2007
VOLUME 1, NUMBER 3
MICA (P) 150/03/2007
Battlefield C4ISTAR
Taiwan: DPP holds the reins
Singapore Defence
QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ
Expiry date: _____________ Signature: __________________________
Q My Cheque Payable to Asian Press Group Pte Ltd for $ _______ is enclosed
Regional Navies Directory
Rank/Title: _______________________________ Initials: ___________ Family Name: _______________________________
Job Title: Organisation: ____ Address: ____________________________ City: _______ Postcode: _________ State: _______
Country: ________________ Ph: ____________________ Fax: _______________________ Email: _____________________
POST, PHONE, FAX OR EMAIL YOUR SUBSCRIPTION TO THE ASIAN PRESS GROUP
PO Box 88 Miranda, NSW 1490, Australia. Ph: +61 2 9526 7188 Fax: +61 2 9526 1779 Email: [email protected]

REVIEW - Defence Review Asia

Transcription

Similar documents

Transformers Crossovers Star Wars Obi Wan Kenobi Jedi Starfighter

Wherever you are. Whenever you need it.

7.2 Abbreviations 7.3 Symbols

USS Deweyenters service

Court visits scene of shooting

Investor Update - Paris 2009 Defence Aerospace Axel - Rolls

NASAMS Multi-Missile Launcher

Procurement programmes in Denmark

Print - Preamble to US Constitution